Dreamscarred Press Announces: Path of War Expanded (new thread)

[Vhaidara]

Archetypes can't change BAB, Hit Dice or Saves.

This was going to be a separate class, not a Fighter Archetype. Hence why I said I was going to homebrew a class like that.

[Elricaltovilla]

This was going to be a separate class, not a Fighter Archetype. Hence why I said I was going to homebrew a class like that.

I misread that then. Sorry.

EDIT: Oh, and you're not allowed to homebrew that class until you finish writing the rest of the Perfect Awesomeness Discipline.


You Win
Perfect Awesomeness (Strike)
Level: 9
Initiation Action: 1 Immediate action
Range: Personal
Target: You
Duration: Instantaneous

You win. The game is over, and you're the victor. Nobody is better than you. Congratulations, ****.

[Snowbluff]

Archetypes can't change BAB, Hit Dice or Saves.

Variants, like Battle Sorcerer, can.

[Ilorin Lorati]

Variants aren't archetypes.

[Vhaidara]

I misread that then. Sorry.

EDIT: Oh, and you're not allowed to homebrew that class until you finish writing the rest of the Perfect Awesomeness Discipline.


You Win
Perfect Awesomeness (Strike)
Level: 9
Initiation Action: 1 Immediate action
Range: Personal
Target: You
Duration: Instantaneous

You win. The game is over, and you're the victor. Nobody is better than you. Congratulations, ****.


Oh man, I hadn't even considered what that class could do with Perfect Awesomeness...I was just thinking of low level BS from Strikes in place of attacks (Flurry Strike for 2 strikes from other disciplines)

[Elricaltovilla]

Oh man, I hadn't even considered what that class could do with Perfect Awesomeness...I was just thinking of low level BS from Strikes in place of attacks (Flurry Strike for 2 strikes from other disciplines)

Well, get to it man!

[Snowbluff]

Variants aren't archetypes.

Oh man, the sticker fell off!

[Ilorin Lorati]

I do, however, find it hilarious that it's quite kosher to do everything short of it. You could probably get away with a class feature that sets BAB equal to class level (for those levels) while making a full attack, attack action, and for the purpose of feats, and gives +1 or +2 HP per level. Poor man's martial character. :smallamused:

[Nyaa]

High level Riven Hourglass maneuvers' prerequisites have copypaste errors all over the place. IIRC it should be 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 maneuvers known.

[Tempestfury]

With this I could finally make a character with Mithral Current :smallbiggrin:

... What stopped you from doing so in the first place?


I have to concur with the majority. Stealth is nice, but the 'super trick shot' discipline makes it unique. My only beef is, as I've said previously, the randomly variable methods of making said trick shots.


The way I see it, the discipline is being pulled a handful of different ways: trick shots, sniping (read: high range), and stealth. Any 2 of the three works fine for me, but I don't think it has room to fit all 3.

I really like the thought of the discipline being trick focused with a bit of stealth to disorient your enemies and gain an upper hand, since robin hood wouldn't have been long range all that often in the forests of Nottingham.

Yeah, that summarizes what I'm hoping from Tempest Gale myself. The long-range focus seemed cool, but I think that can be saved for a later date really. Focus on the trick-shot discipline now, with great CMB usage. Through you need to straighten up what you actually use to perform the trick-shots.


Is it intended that none of the second tier style feats require you to be in that style to function?

Unrelated to any of the above: I love the dual discipline feats and encourage you guys to add a million more of them.

I have to agree with this. The second tier style feats don't really grab my interest that much, not compared to the first and third tier feats especially, and the dual discipline feats are very flavourable as well as helping support unconventional fighting styles. I would love to see a Mirthal Current/Scarlet Throne feat, as well as a Thrashing Dragon/Broken Blade feat.

[squiggit]

... What stopped you from doing so in the first place?

I'm guessing it's the feeling that unless you're playing a Bard Perform(Dance) for Mithral Current feels kine of truespeak-y and if you're not a mystic you're potentially losing a nice skill for it.

Though avoiding skill check maneuvers in Current isn't too hard, can understand the feeling.

[Tempestfury]

Considering the skill check maneuvers in Mithral are some of their best maneuvers, I can see why people might be annoyed that MC has Dance as its skill, but might I point out the Agile Dancer feat that already exists? Allows you to use Dance in place of acrobatics, and dex for Dance instead of Cha?

[squiggit]

Yeah, agile dancer certainly helps, but even if agile dancer is a good solution for your character, then you can complain about feats since that bumps up the number of feats you need to burn on MC to four (quick draw, mixed combat, mithral current style if you want to AoO and agile dancer if you want to use the skill)... or two if you're a bushi (or one, just agile dancer actually if I'm correct about how the bushi's mixed combat should work)

[Ironsides]

I know I have asked this a few days ago but I have not received a response so I'll repost the question. I need an answer ASAP because I am in a playtest with AGrinningCat.

Guard's Oath doesn't provide the DC is for this mysterious save? What is the duration of this curse? As it stands now they are cursed forever or until they die of old age because they can't make a save against something that has no DC. :smallmad:


Guard’s Oath
Eternal Guardian (Strike) [Curse]
Level: 1
Initiation Action: 1 standard action
Range: Melee attack
Target: One creature
Duration: Instant and 24 hours (see text)
Save: Will negates
A central concept of the discipline of the Eternal Guardian is the ability to restrict an opponent’s movement - prevent their escape or halting their advance. This basic but potent strike allows the disciple to harry and disrupt a threat until they lay down their arms. Make a melee attack. If you succeed, your opponent must make a Will save or its movement becomes cursed. Any movement by a creature cursed by this effect provokes an attack of opportunity from you, even a 5 foot step or the withdraw action. All attacks of opportunity you make against that creature gain a +2 bonus on their attack roll for the duration of the curse. If the creature drops all weapons it is holding, it gains a new save to end the effect. A creature that is not holding a weapon can draw or pick up a weapon and then drop it to gain a save but can never gain more than one save per round against this curse.


Terrifying Blow suffers from a similar problem. No save DC provided. Is it like a normal intimidate check (10 + the target’s Hit Dice + the target’s Wisdom modifier) or is it its own thing?


Terrifying Blow
Eternal Guardian (Strike) [Fear]
Level: 1
Initiation Action: 1 standard action
Range: Melee attack
Target: One creature
Duration: One round
Save: Will negates
With a bellowing cry, the disciple delivers a fearsome wound to his opponent. Make a melee attack; if successful, your opponent must make a Will save or be frightened for one round. If your opponent is cursed, your attack deals an additional 1d6 damage.


I would like an answer soon because the playtest begins in 30 minutes.

[squiggit]

Pretty sure ever maneuver has the same standardized DC that was described earlier. 10+ maneuver level + initiating modified. Same as everything else similar too

[Elricaltovilla]

All maneuver use the same DC for their saves. 10+maneuver level+Initiation modifier.

Terrifying blow's intimidate is a normal intimidate check.

[Ironsides]

Ok thanks but that isnt clear if you look at other disciplines like Steel Serpent or Unquiet Grave.

[Turion]

Ok thanks but that isnt clear if you look at other disciplines like Steel Serpent or Unquiet Grave.



Saving Throw Difficulty Class: The formula for determining a saving throw DC against a maneuver’s special effect is 10 + maneuver level + initiator modifier.

The maneuvers that list saving throws in the descriptions are just a reminder; the save formula is explicitly listed. Might e nice to standardize whether or not they're listed, but it's not completely necessary.

[Tempestfury]

Yeah... okay I admit, Mithral Current does have a rather heavy cost if you don't get it using the Bushi Template, and even then it honestly doesn't have enough rewards for the amount of effort required to put into it. I think it should have more of the 'vulnerability to silver' and 'treat weapon as silver' manuverers, along with a bit more damage in the later strikes for drawing your blade when attacking.

[DarkSonic1337]

I personally think it'd be cool to have the "metal" wave maneuvers scale with higher numbers of attacks rather than damage. Something like this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sT2YDQrx98A#t=5m43s).

And I think one way to lessen the burden on characters wanting mithral current without a Bushi dip would be to add "you may sheathe your weapon after performing this maneuver" to some of the maneuvers.

[RedOndjage]

For the Knight Disciple Archetype, the capstone ability allows you to heal for max damage with Lay on Hands and Channel Positive Energy. Should this be changed to have some interaction with Guardian Shield and Silver Crane heals? My fiancee is playing one and while I was helping her build the character I noticed that part of the capstone for paladins is currently useless for the archetype as written.

[Tempestfury]

So from the playtest. A Bushi is actually very powerful at low-levels. With Quick Draw, Swift Current and Reaching Blade Stance, as long as you move and strike each turn, it can actually deal an attack at +5ft reach, treat the enemy as flatflooted and do +2d6 damage.

[MilleniaAntares]

I've been looking over the Harbinger, and I feel that the Water Dweller option for Grim News would be better if it also allowed the character to walk on water.

The same for the water option of the Enter the Vortex stance for Elemental Flux.

Maybe it's just me? I dunno.


Considering the skill check maneuvers in Mithral are some of their best maneuvers, I can see why people might be annoyed that MC has Dance as its skill, but might I point out the Agile Dancer feat that already exists? Allows you to use Dance in place of acrobatics, and dex for Dance instead of Cha?
Agile Dancer is good, except for the part where you need to be level 3 to use it.

[Milo v3]

... What stopped you from doing so in the first place?


Because there's only one concept where I'd ever want my character to have Perform (Dance), and iaijutsu isn't that concept. Meaning it just ruins my verisimilitude when my warrior Has to be an amazing dancer to have pulling his sword out really quickly as his combat style.

[Elricaltovilla]

Because there's only one concept where I'd ever want my character to have Perform (Dance), and iaijutsu isn't that concept. Meaning it just ruins my verisimilitude when my warrior Has to be an amazing dancer to have pulling his sword out really quickly as his combat style.

Well, it was either that or Swim, so...:smalltongue:

[squiggit]

Agile Dancer is good, except for the part where you need to be level 3 to use it.

Yeah.

And you're looking at a Mithral Current Mystic (because that's the only class that gets MC) not having everything he needs (quick draw, free action sheath, AoOs while sheathed, Dex to dancer) until 9. Hell, can't even do the basic Mithral Current stuff at level 1 (because you have to wait until your bonus feat at level 2 to quick draw).

So I think that leaves a few questions:

Is MC competitive with other damage oriented disciplines without Quick Draw? Probably not, but like I said only one class gets MC and it can't quick draw until 2.

Is MC competitive enough with Quick Draw but nothing else? That is to say, is there enough power in the discipline to account for not being able to make AoOs and having to sacrifice move actions for maximum efficacy (and probably your swift so you can avoid provoking when you sheath).

And: Is MC better than other disciplines to the point that it compensates for being three to four feats down compared with a more traditional build?

Also still have some other comments on the MC feats earlier.

[Seerow]

Well, it was either that or Swim, so...:smalltongue:

Why exactly wouldn't Sleight of Hand be an option there? I mean it's already used for grabbing weapons unnoticed, if it is intended to be an Iajutsu style SoH seems like a perfect fit.

[Tempestfury]

In all honestly, I think Perform (Dance) actually fits Iaijutsu. Samurai treated combat more than simply a way to defeat your enemies. But a lifestyle... an art. So, having the skill be Perform for Iaijutsu works completely, and with how nimble and agile Samurai are, Dance makes sense.

Plus, from my experience, you only really need quick-draw in order to do good using Mithral Current. The free-action sheathe and AoO when sheathe is good and all. But your more than likely going to use a move action to move, which lets you sheathe as a free action during a move, then standard action to do a strike.

[Milo v3]

In all honestly, I think Perform (Dance) actually fits Iaijutsu. Samurai treated combat more than simply a way to defeat your enemies. But a lifestyle... an art. So, having the skill be Perform for Iaijutsu works completely, and with how nimble and agile Samurai are, Dance makes sense.

Skilled in quickly using hands with finesse vs. dancing. No, sleight of hand makes more sense....

[Tempestfury]

Skilled in quickly using hands with finesse vs. dancing. No, sleight of hand makes more sense....

No it does not... sleight of hand is quick, subtle movements of the hand. Stage tricks and pickpocketing

[Milo v3]

No it does not... sleight of hand is quick, subtle movements of the hand. Stage tricks and pickpocketing

And dancing is moving your hips to music. :smallannoyed:

[Jurai]

Why not split the difference and make it an option for the character to choose?

[Tempestfury]

And dancing is moving your hips to music. :smallannoyed:

Oh I'm sorry, I forgot that dancing is so simple that there is only multiple (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Step_Up_%28film_series%29) different (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footloose_%281984_film%29) movies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Fever) about dancing, including a classic movie with a classic song (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9BbUqHrWFI). Nor is there multipule (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-boying) different (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tap_dance) complicated (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dances) dance styles, and a Japanese martial arts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kata) movement liked to dance

Please forgive my grievous transgression in believing that the research I had done and my knowledge of samurai and Japanese culture through reading was worth absolutely nothing in this current discussion.

[Forrestfire]

I believe the implication was that you had been the person who stated an ill-researched opinion, and as such, stating "dancing is moving your hips to music" would serve to point that out to you.

Because sleight of hand is way more than stage tricks and pickpocketing.

[Seerow]

Oh I'm sorry, I forgot that dancing is so simple that there is only multiple (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Step_Up_%28film_series%29) different (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footloose_%281984_film%29) movies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Fever) about dancing, including a classic movie with a classic song (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9BbUqHrWFI). Nor is there multipule (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-boying) different (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tap_dance) complicated (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dances) dance styles, and a Japanese martial arts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kata) movement liked to dance

Please forgive my grievous transgression in believing that the research I had done and my knowledge of samurai and Japanese culture through reading was worth absolutely nothing in this current discussion.

The point is you are selling sleight of hand as far short as he did dance with his statement.

[deuxhero]

Note that Current isn't particularlly dependent upon skill checks. Just don't take manuvers that require a skill roll

Why was Swim rejected anyways? Strength based initating with Martial Training? The ability to take 10 if you had a swim speed?

[Tempestfury]

... Ummmm.... No.... it wasn't?

I guess I missed card tricks alongside with it, but as a brief summary as to what sleight of hand is. Stage tricks, card tricks and possibly pick-pocketing basically covers it. Sleight of hand is about small, quick and subtle movement of the hand, flicking small items like cards, coins and at most daggers and arrows in and out of view. Street Magicians, Card Sharks, Card throwing and fancy shuffling is a bit of an expended list of what sleight of hand mainly consist off.

I'm sorry, but sleight of hand, and dance, simply do not compare in the depth, variety, wonder, history and culture.

[squiggit]

... Ummmm.... No.... it wasn't?

I guess I missed card tricks alongside with it, but as a brief summary as to what sleight of hand is. Stage tricks, card tricks and possibly pick-pocketing basically covers it. Sleight of hand is about small, quick and subtle movement of the hand, flicking small items like cards, coins and at most daggers and arrows in and out of view. Street Magicians, Card Sharks, Card throwing and fancy shuffling is a bit of an expended list of what sleight of hand mainly consist off.

I'm sorry, but sleight of hand, and dance, simply do not compare in the depth, variety, wonder, history and culture.

What does culture have to do with it?

I think the point was the Mithral Current is a disicpline whose primary gimmick is being fast with your hands (iajutsu and hell, the ninth level maneuver is a standard action full attack) and so the skill that's based around being fast with your hands probably makes sense, at least as much sense as... dancing does, if not more. And I'm not sure what wonder or history has to do with that.

[Doomeye56]

What does culture have to do with it?

I think the point was the Mithral Current is a disicpline whose primary gimmick is being fast with your hands (iajutsu and hell, the ninth level maneuver is a standard action full attack) and so the skill that's based around being fast with your hands probably makes sense, at least as much sense as... dancing does, if not more. And I'm not sure what wonder or history has to do with that.

Iaijustu has very little to do with just fast hands. Its all about clear flowing movements. I believe (Dance) is much more appropriate.

[ErrantX]

Skilled in quickly using hands with finesse vs. dancing. No, sleight of hand makes more sense....


No it does not... sleight of hand is quick, subtle movements of the hand. Stage tricks and pickpocketing


And dancing is moving your hips to music. :smallannoyed:

Elric, I'm gonna weigh in on this here and please override me if I'm out of line.

Perform was used to imply the skill level of motion involved to make lightning fast, precise movements and move with grace and power. Swimming doesn't make sense. Sleight of Hand could work, but personally? I think something like Craft (Calligraphy) makes more sense is more fitting with samurai culture. It would also express the precise and fluid motions of hands and arms and body as well if you think about it. Ancient calligraphy was sometimes performed with large sticks in sand or oversized brushes with ink on rice paper and done standing. It's not my discipline, so hopefully Elric will weigh in on this. Perform works for me.

-X

[Tempestfury]

Iaijustu has very little to do with just fast hands. Its all about clear flowing movements. I believe (Dance) is much more appropriate.

Yes. This. Exactly.

[Milo v3]

Elric, I'm gonna weigh in on this here and please override me if I'm out of line.

Perform was used to imply the skill level of motion involved to make lightning fast, precise movements and move with grace and power. Swimming doesn't make sense. Sleight of Hand could work, but personally? I think something like Craft (Calligraphy) makes more sense is more fitting with samurai culture. It would also express the precise and fluid motions of hands and arms and body as well if you think about it. Ancient calligraphy was sometimes performed with large sticks in sand or oversized brushes with ink on rice paper and done standing. It's not my discipline, so hopefully Elric will way weigh in on this.

-X

I would be happy if it was calligraphy, very wuxia.

[Elricaltovilla]

I was actually going to weigh in on this. I'm keeping the discipline skill as Perform (Dance). Not only do I find it thematically appropriate, I think it creates great imagery and fits the flowery naming conventions of the discipline . Mithral Current is as much an art as it is a Martial Art and I like that.

[ErrantX]

Another strange suggestion:


Split the Streams
Riven Hourglass (Boost)
Level: 9
Initiation Action: 1 swift action
Range: Personal
Target: You
Duration: 1 round / initiator level

You tear your time-stream in two, rending reality asunder and bringing a duplicate of yourself into the world. The duplicate is identical to you in all ways and possess all of your items (except single-use or charged items that replicated spells with an XP cost or expensive material component cost) and abilities. It fights under your control, on your initiative count, for as long as it continues to exist. If reduced to 0 hit points or below, it immediately ceases to exist.

At the end of the effect (or when the duplicate vanishes, whichever comes first) you advance one temporary age category due to the chronological strain on your own timeline, although you do not gain the mental bonuses that this would normally entail (treat this as an age category advancement that vanishes the next time you take an 8-hour rest). If you were already Venerable, you die of old age immediately upon the duplicate vanishing.

So I've sat around and stared at this maneuver a long time.

I was not thrilled about a strike at 9th either, but I was having trouble making the mechanics work for what I had. I originally had a maneuver like this as the 9th level but I thought it was too much. There are many opinions I trust on this board to have good heads about game balance and such, and Djinn is one of them.

With your permission Djinn, I'd like to use this maneuver with the following alterations:


Split the Stream
Riven Hourglass (Boost)
Level: 9
Prerequisites: Four Riven Hourglass maneuvers
Initiation Action: 1 swift action
Range: Personal
Target: You
Duration: 1 + initiation modifier rounds

You tear your time-stream in two, rending reality asunder and bringing a duplicate of yourself into the world. The duplicate is identical to you in all ways and possess all of your attributes, abilities and items (except single-use or charged items that replicated spells with an XP cost or expensive material component cost). It fights under your control as an extension of your own consciousness and on your initiative count, for as long as it continues to exist. Maneuvers, spells, or other abilities used by the duplicate are used from your available stock and if used by the duplicate are expended. If you or the duplicate are reduced to 0 hit points or below, it immediately ceases to exist.

At the end of the effect (or when the duplicate vanishes, whichever comes first) you advance one temporary age category due to the chronological strain on your own timeline, although you do not gain the mental bonuses that this would normally entail (treat this as an age category advancement that vanishes the next time you take an 8-hour rest). If you were already Venerable, you are immediately reduced to 0 hit points and become unconscious upon the duplicate vanishing.

Thoughts everyone?

-X

[ErrantX]

I was actually going to weigh in on this. I'm keeping the discipline skill as Perform (Dance). Not only do I find it thematically appropriate, I think it creates great imagery and fits the flowery naming conventions of the discipline . Mithral Current is as much an art as it is a Martial Art and I like that.

Done and done. Perform (Dance) stands!

-X

[Vhaidara]

I don't like that you removed the part where it killed you if you overuse it. I like the suicide nova option. It is WAY too tame if it just removes you from combat. This is probably the most powerful 9th in PoW, it should have a sizable drawback.

[ErrantX]

I don't like that you removed the part where it killed you if you overuse it. I like the suicide nova option. It is WAY too tame if it just removes you from combat. This is probably the most powerful 9th in PoW, it should have a sizable drawback.

True, but a "I kill myself using this" isn't a precedent in Paizo design elements. I don't know of a single spell or power that does that sort of thing. Being reduced to 0 HP and knocked unconscious does burn up resources and time to recover so it's still a sizeable penalty. I liken it to being like the old Diamond Mind 9th but obviously stronger. I worry that this is far, far stronger and I'm looking for ways to include limitations on the duplicate. Isolating it from your spells/maneuvers may be the best way to do it, then they're just limited to your feats and other abilities.

-X

EDIT: As an aside, I wanted to ask and see how people are feeling about Mithral Current being a staple in Mystic? Does it feel forced or does it feel like a fit? Any feedback at all would be great!

[Doomeye56]

I like the new 9th for Riven Hourglass its something that when I see it makes me want to progress to get it instead of it just being a strong bonus for getting to that level range.

[Vhaidara]

True, but a "I kill myself using this" isn't a precedent in Paizo design elements. I don't know of a single spell or power that does that sort of thing. Being reduced to 0 HP and knocked unconscious does burn up resources and time to recover so it's still a sizeable penalty. I liken it to being like the old Diamond Mind 9th but obviously stronger. I worry that this is far, far stronger and I'm looking for ways to include limitations on the duplicate. Isolating it from your spells/maneuvers may be the best way to do it, then they're just limited to your feats and other abilities.

"Balance" is also not a precedent of Paizo design elements. Hasn't stopped you guys. I feel the kill is more flavorful and a better limiter. And less abusable.

[Fenryr]

Mithral Current on the Mystic is ok, not needed but ok. You know, silver energy.

About the Riven Hourglass level 9 maneuver I recall it was asked before: What about the races that can't age? Also, if you wish to "nerf" it how about 1/2 HP or a penalty on saving throws, BAB and such?

[Ironsides]

If Mythral Current is added to the mystic I request that proficiency with Katanas are added to it as well.

[squiggit]

As an aside, I wanted to ask and see how people are feeling about Mithral Current being a staple in Mystic? Does it feel forced or does it feel like a fit? Any feedback at all would be great!

I like it. Just, as previously stated, Mithral Current requires a huge feat investment to function effectively and anyone other than the Bushi lacks that being built into their class.

The Mystic kind of suffers even more because quick draw and mixed combat both have BAB requirements, which pushes their access to those to 2 and 9 instead of 1 and 7 (or 1 and 6 for the bushi).

[ErrantX]

"Balance" is also not a precedent of Paizo design elements. Hasn't stopped you guys. I feel the kill is more flavorful and a better limiter. And less abusable.

lol, then we gotta be better than that because we're 3rd party and half the time banned before we hit the table or when the DM is asked an automatic "No" happens. DSP has to overcome those objections by doing it right! :smallcool:

It hasn't stopped us sometimes, but then again, we rolled the dice on PoW's success. I'm all about taking risks but I don't want to jump the shark either. You're right about it being more flavor-filled and less abuse-ridden.


Mithral Current on the Mystic is ok, not needed but ok. You know, silver energy.

About the Riven Hourglass level 9 maneuver I recall it was asked before: What about the races that can't age? Also, if you wish to "nerf" it how about 1/2 HP or a penalty on saving throws, BAB and such?

Fair.

What races can't age? In that rare situation, I'd just say it burns away at your timeline anyway and causes some reduction in strength. You'd still hit the category penalties.


If Mythral Current is added to the mystic I request that proficiency with Katanas are added to it as well.

I'd like to leave that a bushi thing. Plus, there are a lot of blades that could be drawn from the hip. Plus katanas are martial when two-handed.


I like it. Just, as previously stated, Mithral Current requires a huge feat investment to function effectively and anyone other than the Bushi lacks that being built into their class.

The Mystic kind of suffers even more because quick draw and mixed combat both have BAB requirements, which pushes their access to those to 2 and 9 instead of 1 and 7 (or 1 and 6 for the bushi).

We're adding stuff into the strikes that resheathe the weapon. Mithral Current strikes that use fast draws can still be done with expending your move action - there is a feat tax for Quick Draw styles yes, but there are lots of commonly accepted combat methods that have feat taxes as a way to start them off. Finesse, TWF, Shields, etc.

-X

[Vhaidara]

lol, then we gotta be better than that because we're 3rd party and half the time banned before we hit the table or when the DM is asked an automatic "No" happens. DSP has to overcome those objections by doing it right! :smallcool:

It hasn't stopped us sometimes, but then again, we rolled the dice on PoW's success. I'm all about taking risks but I don't want to jump the shark either. You're right about it being more flavor-filled and less abuse-ridden.

As a note, when I wrote that, I was currently in queue for a mission with friends. I should have been asleep an hour ago. I'm rectifying this now.

But yeah, I just feel that it gets rid of a lot of abuse ("Hey, I'm going to go supernova, heal me when it ends") and is a lot more flavorful (I would actually go full out, as it ends, their body turns to dust as time turns on them), so I think it should stay




What races can't age? In that rare situation, I'd just say it burns away at your timeline anyway and causes some reduction in strength. You'd still hit the category penalties.

-X

Dragons and Undead spring to mind. and I don't think most outsiders age. This is less the realm of PC usage and more NPC/non-standard campaigns.

[Elricaltovilla]

I like it. Just, as previously stated, Mithral Current requires a huge feat investment to function effectively and anyone other than the Bushi lacks that being built into their class.

The Mystic kind of suffers even more because quick draw and mixed combat both have BAB requirements, which pushes their access to those to 2 and 9 instead of 1 and 7 (or 1 and 6 for the bushi).

I was just gonna surprise you all, but I'll go ahead and ease your fears now. I'll be spending tomorrow working on easing the feat requirements of Mithral Current. Quick Draw will probably still be necessary (although you can get around it by having +1 BAB and drawing your weapon as part of another move action), but I'll be working to add some extra threatened area and sheathing stuff.

As a side note, I realize that Mithral Current is billed as the Iaijutsu discipline, but don't feel like you have to get too hung up on the samurai fluff. The discipline is open to anyone who wants to use it, and you should feel free to use your imagination to branch out on the discipline's origins and philosophies in your games.

[Fenryr]

What races can't age? In that rare situation, I'd just say it burns away at your timeline anyway and causes some reduction in strength. You'd still hit the category penalties.

-X

I play 3.PF so a couple of 'em exist. For a PF only what about undeads? Elementals? Elans actually don't age at all.

[Ilorin Lorati]

Yeah, the general undead immunity to damage and drain for physical ability scores might make the attack a bit more powerful in a Lords of the Night campaign than intended.

I'm not even sure if the vampires presented in the supplement even age; it's a normal lore thing for them, but I can't find anything in the doc that says whether they do or not.

[squiggit]

We're adding stuff into the strikes that resheathe the weapon. Mithral Current strikes that use fast draws can still be done with expending your move action - there is a feat tax for Quick Draw styles yes, but there are lots of commonly accepted combat methods that have feat taxes as a way to start them off. Finesse, TWF, Shields, etc.

-X


I don't mind feats to build upon a fighting style. It's just that, as is, MC requires a LOT of them (quick draw, mithral current style, mixed combat and possibly agile dancer). There's also the question of efficacy. You're four feats deep in Iaijustu but


Regarding Perform: I agree it's thematic. It's fun. Fitting. Cool. Inspirational. But my biggest concern is one of mechanics. The feat feels really truespeak-y: As a mystic I'm losing one of not very many skillpoints into a skill that doesn't give me anything on its own, but adds to my efficacy in combat with a few maneuvers. 3+level on a class that doesn't pump int and in-house has other disciplines that eat skills? Sucks.

I pump Perform for MC, Craft for SM, Spellcraft for Flux and Autohypnosis for RH and... you're making the fighter look like a skillmonkey.

It also sucks as a Bushi or Lens Maker because the skill trade isn't always a very fun one. Thankfully every class that qualifies for Bushi has BB or TD and Fury, so you can dump the former for agile dancer or the latter because survival is niche.

[MilleniaAntares]

I play 3.PF so a couple of 'em exist. For a PF only what about undeads? Elementals? Elans actually don't age at all.
Not to mention monks and druids have non-aging class features, as well as other (prestige) classes.

Though, this is likely to only come up with gestalt games.

[ErrantX]

So how would you feel about a fighter with grit and some deeds (nothing so extensive as to be compared with the gunslinger). Minor stuff, stuff a fighter -should- be able to do. I ask this because I've consulted Prince of Knives on it and he feels that its not a good plan. I look at it and it think that it "fixes" the class, but we're not necessarily here to do that. Between giving it up to 6th level maneuver access and some deeds and grit, I think to myself that fighter becomes a viable class in a game with martial initiators as well as spellcasting classes. Consider also that it trades out several of its bonus feats as opposed to stuff like weapon and armor training, so it makes itself available to many (like 90%) of the fighter archetypes out there.

Before I share a link to something, I would like some initial feedback to the pitch.

-X

[PlatinumVixen]

On the one hand it does seem a little outside the scope of what you're trying to do on some level, and potentially a bit busy in concept. On the other hand, color me cautiously intrigued by literally any attempt at improving the Fighter, even if it's just with the abilities of other martial classes.

[Ilorin Lorati]

Considering I'm of the opinion that Gunslinger could have about half again as many as it does options with grit, the early comment about not being as extensive as that gives me pause ("Are you giving them them, like... 2 things to use grit on?"), but it seems like it might give them a good niche as to things they can do when combined with the other specialized archetypes.


Though, this is likely to only come up with gestalt games.

It's more likely than you think. Since Autohypnosis is Wis which means both of those classes have good reason to pump it, and both the Martial Training line and the partial initiator archetypes can use Advanced Study to get higher level maneuvers it's quite likely that it'll be available to them if they want it.

[Kymera]

Quote Originally Posted by Kymera View Post
Starting at lvl3, a regular warder using defensive focus can attack people further away with a melee weapon than a hawkguard using ranged defensive focus can with a bow or other ranged weapon. Is it intentional for ranged defensive focus to lack regular defensive focus's scaling reach with level?
<snip>
This is the first I've heard of the Warder defensive focus area / hawkguard area, so I'll have to check some math on that.


Thanks. Not sure what math there is to check, so I think I may have failed the first time to clearly communicate the nature of the problem. The issue isn't that the archetype scales more poorly, causing it to get outraced at higher levels, but that the archetype loses scaling entirely. A regular Warder in Defensive Focus has a reach equal to her normal reach plus 5' per initiator level. For the hawkguard in Ranged Defensive Focus, it's 15'. Not 15' per initiator level, not 15' plus N per initiator level, just a flat 15'.
For the regular Warden, if medium-size and wielding a longsword, this gives 20' by level 3, enough to outreach the hawkguard's bow, and by level 20, the regular warden's is out to 105', while the hawkguard is still at 15'. It just doesn't feel right to me for the ranged guy with a projectile weapon to have that much less range than the melee guy with a melee weapon, which is why I suspected an error.

Edit: Misread, it is +5' per 5 initiator levels, not per one. Still has the problem I described, but not until late levels (Longsword wielding medium-size regular Warder still exceeds the range of the same-level Hawkguard's bow at level 15, and matches it at level 10, while a Medium regular Warder with a reach weapon matches the Hawkguard at level 5, and exceeds them at level 10. Not nearly as extreme of numbers at the high end either (for a Medium Warder, at most you'd get double the reach if you're level 20 and use a reach weapon), but still enough to clash with the idea that the ranged guy with a projectile weapon should have more range than the melee guy with a melee weapon.

[Anlashok]

Grit-Fighter?

Interesting conceptually. Depends on what the options are. Agree with above that the described few number of options is potentially a downer, but if they're good, dynamic choices it sounds awesome.


Obviously still partial to my full progression access to every discipline with discounts idea, but this one sounds nice.

[PsyBomb]

ErrantX, at least two races out of Bloodforge don't age (Houri and Spring Children)

[deuxhero]

True, but a "I kill myself using this" isn't a precedent in Paizo design elements. I don't know of a single spell or power that does that sort of thing.

Monk of the Healing Hands' "True Sacrifice" is an amazing capstone that lets you stop playing a monk 20 character and roll something else and forces everyone to never mention that monk character again.

(oddly enough if you don't use it its STILL better than the feature it replaces because it doesn't strip you of enlarge person)

[MilleniaAntares]

So how would you feel about a fighter with grit and some deeds (nothing so extensive as to be compared with the gunslinger).
Do you mean actually using grit and deeds, or do you mean using a per-day class resource and abilities that rely on either having a certain amount of that resource left or spending the resource?

Personally, I like the idea of something similar to animus for the fighter, rather than a per-day resource like grit.

However, I am certain I wouldn't mind seeing grit being used.


It's more likely than you think. Since Autohypnosis is Wis which means both of those classes have good reason to pump it, and both the Martial Training line and the partial initiator archetypes can use Advanced Study to get higher level maneuvers it's quite likely that it'll be available to them if they want it.
Advanced Study allows them to take maneuvers over level 6 for Martial Training and the archetypes?

Honestly, a bit of the language in Path of War - and the class chart design for the primary initiators - is a bit weird.

[Sayt]

So how would you feel about a fighter with grit and some deeds (nothing so extensive as to be compared with the gunslinger). Minor stuff, stuff a fighter -should- be able to do. I ask this because I've consulted Prince of Knives on it and he feels that its not a good plan. I look at it and it think that it "fixes" the class, but we're not necessarily here to do that. Between giving it up to 6th level maneuver access and some deeds and grit, I think to myself that fighter becomes a viable class in a game with martial initiators as well as spellcasting classes. Consider also that it trades out several of its bonus feats as opposed to stuff like weapon and armor training, so it makes itself available to many (like 90%) of the fighter archetypes out there.

Before I share a link to something, I would like some initial feedback to the pitch.

-X

I like the idea of a fighter which uses deeds and maneuvers, especially if grit recovery is via killing/critting with deeds, rather than a specific weapon.

[Tempestfury]

I was just gonna surprise you all, but I'll go ahead and ease your fears now. I'll be spending tomorrow working on easing the feat requirements of Mithral Current. Quick Draw will probably still be necessary (although you can get around it by having +1 BAB and drawing your weapon as part of another move action), but I'll be working to add some extra threatened area and sheathing stuff.

As a side note, I realize that Mithral Current is billed as the Iaijutsu discipline, but don't feel like you have to get too hung up on the samurai fluff. The discipline is open to anyone who wants to use it, and you should feel free to use your imagination to branch out on the discipline's origins and philosophies in your games.

Wooo! Awesome, cannot wait to see what changes you bring to Mithral Current.

[Ilorin Lorati]

Advanced Study allows them to take maneuvers over level 6 for Martial Training and the archetypes?

Honestly, a bit of the language in Path of War - and the class chart design for the primary initiators - is a bit weird.


Yep: 10chars


The current RAW permits them to learn 7th-and-higher maneuvers through Advanced Study. IIRC this technically also works with Martial Training. We're okay with this.

[Prime32]

So how would you feel about a fighter with grit and some deeds (nothing so extensive as to be compared with the gunslinger). Minor stuff, stuff a fighter -should- be able to do. I ask this because I've consulted Prince of Knives on it and he feels that its not a good plan. I look at it and it think that it "fixes" the class, but we're not necessarily here to do that. Between giving it up to 6th level maneuver access and some deeds and grit, I think to myself that fighter becomes a viable class in a game with martial initiators as well as spellcasting classes. Consider also that it trades out several of its bonus feats as opposed to stuff like weapon and armor training, so it makes itself available to many (like 90%) of the fighter archetypes out there.

Before I share a link to something, I would like some initial feedback to the pitch.

-XI'd be okay with a system that's similar to grit, as long as it isn't called grit and doesn't work exactly the same way. There's already a fighter/grit-user hybrid (swashbuckler), and actually using grit would step on its toes - if you want to make a grit-based initiator I'd say it makes more sense to use swashbuckler as a base.
It would feel less of a "fix" the more these mechanics are tied closely to your maneuvers, rather than being something that just happens to come with them.

[Elricaltovilla]

Some major updates to Mithral Current have been implemented. Please see the Class Templates (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hHsiSKoL2nR4oWgzPKQwXfqYENuNkDmBiX323SlTPfc/edit?usp=sharing) document to view these changes!

Up next: Tempest Gale, and some other stuff!

[Dgrin]

Yeah.

And you're looking at a Mithral Current Mystic (because that's the only class that gets MC) not having everything he needs (quick draw, free action sheath, AoOs while sheathed, Dex to dancer) until 9. Hell, can't even do the basic Mithral Current stuff at level 1 (because you have to wait until your bonus feat at level 2 to quick draw).

So I think that leaves a few questions:

Is MC competitive with other damage oriented disciplines without Quick Draw? Probably not, but like I said only one class gets MC and it can't quick draw until 2.

Is MC competitive enough with Quick Draw but nothing else? That is to say, is there enough power in the discipline to account for not being able to make AoOs and having to sacrifice move actions for maximum efficacy (and probably your swift so you can avoid provoking when you sheath).

And: Is MC better than other disciplines to the point that it compensates for being three to four feats down compared with a more traditional build?

Also still have some other comments on the MC feats earlier.

That's exactly my thoughts - Mithral Current should either be competitive without feat tax, or be weaker overall but stronger if you're willing to invest in that style. I think I wrote about that already, so let me just quote it:


Mithral Current should be stronger. That is the discipline that forces you into inferior style, you actually need three feats (Quick Draw, Mixed Combat and Mithral Current Style) to be able to consistently draw/sheathe your weapon without messing with your action economy and for your enemies to provoke AoOs from you. That's only the things other styles have by default. In my opinion, the discipline itself should be stronger than average to compensate for it. Thrashing Dragon and Broken Blade are amongst the strongest disciplines for that very reason. I'd like to see more interesting effects when you draw your weapon, so that it was okay if you simply use it and strong if you invest in your combat style.
Even not speaking about power level, a lot of maneuvers there are kinda boring anyway. "You hit your foe for Nd6 damage. If you draw your weapon, the range increases to close/opponent is flat-footed/you can make an additional attack". Actually, as I think about it, they sound boring only because there are a lot of maneuvers which are simply more powerful versions of lower-level maneuvers. I guess I described around half of the strikes there.


On other topics:


We're adding stuff into the strikes that resheathe the weapon. Mithral Current strikes that use fast draws can still be done with expending your move action - there is a feat tax for Quick Draw styles yes, but there are lots of commonly accepted combat methods that have feat taxes as a way to start them off. Finesse, TWF, Shields, etc.

-X

Yes, that's true but Quick Draw style requires you to spend feats before spending other feats on supporting your style. If you want to TWF with Mithral Current or, for example, use it with sword'n'board - you will have to spend both types of feats. Quick Draw is not a combat style on itself. It has nothing to suggest you as a reward for spent feats. That's why I want MC to be weaker that other disciplines without having feats and stronger with them.

Also, are we going to see other ranged archetypes? Right now we have only Hawkguard, and I'd be interested to play some kind of mobile hit-and-run archer based on Harbringer, or, for example, supportive ranged combatant based on Zealot. Yes, I can do that without archetypes but they definitely help.

EDIT: Stalker'd by MC changes, reading them now

EDIT 2: Please, don't do that. Allowing the initiator to re-sheathe weapon as a part of strike is boring and makes all the Iaijutsu stuff feel like fluff - you draw and sheathe it as a part of discipline, so there's no difference between this and, for example, Scarlet Throne in feeling. In my opinion, either make going for Iaijutsu a meaningful choice when you have to lose something to receive awesome things or simply make everything draw/sheathe automatically and leave that as a weird bit of fluff

EDIT 3: I am not into comparing old and new version maneuver by maneuver but as I can see, nothing really changed apart from free sheathe for most strikes and adding more stuff that gives vulnerability to silver. That's neat idea but if you want to pursue that further, add more ways (not too many but a couple would be nice) of utilizing that vulnerability without having to buy silver weapon cause I don't like being denied the choice of material :smalltongue:
Do not forget that you still have a lot of straight upgrades so there is some place for changes

[Tempestfury]

Hmmm,, there is two main changes that I can see.

The first. is that pretty much every single strike and counter now says 'After completing this maneuver you may sheathe your weapon as a free action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.', which I think is a bit too much. Having you able to sheathe your weapon after practically any strike you make, means there is almost no reason at all to take Mixed Combat or Lighting Swap. Don't get me wrong, I really like the idea of having strikes that let you sheathe your weapon, but having the vast majority of them sheathe your weapon feels like overkill. That might just be myself however.

The second of course, is that the 'Wave' strikes, now do more than simply allow you to strike from range if you draw your weapon with your strike, but also give your opponent vulnerability to silver. This is a change I can VERY much get behind, as I absolutely loved that part of Mithral Current and the Mithral Current Slice feat. I do wish there was more ways of having you be able to treat your weapon as silver, but alchemical silver isn't that expensive and the -1 damage penalty is worth the cost of having easy access to these abilities.

[Elricaltovilla]

Hmmm,, there is two main changes that I can see.

The first. is that pretty much every single strike and counter now says 'After completing this maneuver you may sheathe your weapon as a free action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.', which I think is a bit too much. Having you able to sheathe your weapon after practically any strike you make, means there is almost no reason at all to take Mixed Combat or Lighting Swap. Don't get me wrong, I really like the idea of having strikes that let you sheathe your weapon, but having the vast majority of them sheathe your weapon feels like overkill. That might just be myself however.

The second of course, is that the 'Wave' strikes, now do more than simply allow you to strike from range if you draw your weapon with your strike, but also give your opponent vulnerability to silver. This is a change I can VERY much get behind, as I absolutely loved that part of Mithral Current and the Mithral Current Slice feat. I do wish there was more ways of having you be able to treat your weapon as silver, but alchemical silver isn't that expensive and the -1 damage penalty is worth the cost of having easy access to these abilities.

Actually, none of the counters should be giving free sheathing, if there are I need to find them and fix that. I consider the opportunity cost of immediate action attacks to be high enough to warrant needing a little more investment to work. Most of the stances do offer a free sheathing once per round though.

I suppose there's still some wiggle room to find the optimum balance between "you need 4 feats to even use this style" (which you never did, you needed two, the extras just gave more freedom) and "might as well not even take quick draw."

[Milo v3]

You could make it so that you get the free-sheathing if you render an enemy unconscious, dead, or destroyed with the strike.

[Dgrin]

I suppose there's still some wiggle room to find the optimum balance between "you need 4 feats to even use this style" (which you never did, you needed two, the extras just gave more freedom) and "might as well not even take quick draw."

You needed three to have things other styles have by default before taking feats to support your combat style

EDIT: I actually have the feeling that I am ignored by Elric, could someone confirm this for me?

[Vhaidara]

I actually like the removal of crazy feat tax. PF has way too many of those. You shouldn't need to take Quick Draw, Mixed Combat, and Lightning Swap when the discipline you are focusing on is all about that. The discipline investment is what pays for that. Kind of like how Thrashing Dragon lets you do alright at TWF even before you have the entire feat investment. Same with Iron Tortoise.

All Wave maneuvers I previously rated below Blue go up 1 grade. The rest was really Quality of Life improvements (minimizing feat taxation).

For some perspective, I HATE any kind of feat tax. I have condensed most Combat feats down to 2 feats in a chain at most (3 for the longest ones) in my games, and provide a free level 1 bonus feat. If the signature build for a combat style can't come online by level 5, there was a mistake in design.

[Tempestfury]

Actually, none of the counters should be giving free sheathing, if there are I need to find them and fix that. I consider the opportunity cost of immediate action attacks to be high enough to warrant needing a little more investment to work. Most of the stances do offer a free sheathing once per round though.

I suppose there's still some wiggle room to find the optimum balance between "you need 4 feats to even use this style" (which you never did, you needed two, the extras just gave more freedom) and "might as well not even take quick draw."

I think if the stances offer a free action sheathe once per round, you shouldn't need many of the strikes to allow you to sheathe your weapon after using it. That way, you can decide between using Mithral Current stances in order to ensure you can always draw your weapon when making a Mithral Current strike, or picking up a feat and allowing you to sheathe your weapons more effectively in order to be able to use other stances.

[Dgrin]

I actually like the removal of crazy feat tax. PF has way too many of those. You shouldn't need to take Quick Draw, Mixed Combat, and Lightning Swap when the discipline you are focusing on is all about that. The discipline investment is what pays for that. Kind of like how Thrashing Dragon lets you do alright at TWF even before you have the entire feat investment. Same with Iron Tortoise.

All Wave maneuvers I previously rated below Blue go up 1 grade. The rest was really Quality of Life improvements (minimizing feat taxation).

For some perspective, I HATE any kind of feat tax. I have condensed most Combat feats down to 2 feats in a chain at most (3 for the longest ones) in my games, and provide a free level 1 bonus feat. If the signature build for a combat style can't come online by level 5, there was a mistake in design.

In my opinion, the removal of feat tax should be built into stances, like it is done at the moment. If you want your feats, use Ready the Draw to acquire the benefits of your combat style. If you dumped feats to support your combat style, here you are, have other nice things, use other stances etc.

[Ilorin Lorati]

Also, are we going to see other ranged archetypes? Right now we have only Hawkguard, and I'd be interested to play some kind of mobile hit-and-run archer based on Harbringer, or, for example, supportive ranged combatant based on Zealot. Yes, I can do that without archetypes but they definitely help.

The reason we got Hawkguard is because there was no way to handle a ranged warder without an archetype (correct me if I'm wrong on this, X). Almost all of the features worked for melee only, and they didn't even get proficiency with ranged weapons.

You can make a case for Harbinger, but outside the lack of proficiency I think there's only one class feature that only works for melee, and it's a minor one for ranged (Tenebrous Reach). The other loss is strikes out of Cursed Razor and Shattered Mirror; with careful race, feat, and maneuver selection you could probably still make it work though since both of them have a fair number of boosts and counters that still work at range, and the Malevolence feat will let you curse claimed creatures for use with them.

You won't get to be high range, but the average battlefield isn't large enough to worry about that.

[Snowbluff]

In my opinion, the removal of feat tax should be built into stances, like it is done at the moment. If you want your feats, use Ready the Draw to acquire the benefits of your combat style. If you dumped feats to support your combat style, here you are, have other nice things, use other stances etc.

I agree. I don't mind chains if each part is useful, and feat taxes if they're part of a playstyle, but when you're using mithril current, you've already invested levels. The basic stance that allows quick stow should include quick draw.

I also don't like the dance requirement. Replace Iaijutsu!

Is there a feat to stow a weapon as a free action without a stance?

[Powerdork]

The reason we got Hawkguard is because there was no way to handle a ranged warder without an archetype (correct me if I'm wrong on this, X). Almost all of the features worked for melee only, and they didn't even get proficiency with ranged weapons.

You can make a case for Harbinger, but outside the lack of proficiency I think there's only one class feature that only works for melee, and it's a minor one for ranged (Tenebrous Reach). The other loss is strikes out of Cursed Razor and Shattered Mirror; with careful race, feat, and maneuver selection you could probably still make it work though since both of them have a fair number of boosts and counters that still work at range, and the Malevolence feat will let you curse claimed creatures for use with them.

You won't get to be high range, but the average battlefield isn't large enough to worry about that.

I wait for the day when Warlord gets an archetype replacing its flank bonus.

[Ilorin Lorati]

Is there a feat to stow a weapon as a free action without a stance?

Lightning Swap. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/path-of-war/feats#TOC-Lightning-Swap-Combat-)

[squiggit]

Is there a feat to stow a weapon as a free action without a stance?

Mixed Combat from DSP's own Psionics Unleashed lets you stow a weapon as a free action without provoking.

Biggest issue there is the BAB 6 requirement. Bushi gets it as a bonus feat at 6, but Mystics can't get it until 9. Lightning Swap from above can be taken as the 7 bonus feat, but requires a pretty hefty dex investment and has a cap.

[Vhaidara]

On that note, I also don't like the Dance requirement. Yes, it makes sense with the samurai fluff, but it really doesn't make a lot of sense if you AREN'T using samurai fluff. Which, as Elric said here, is something you should feel free to do.


As a side note, I realize that Mithral Current is billed as the Iaijutsu discipline, but don't feel like you have to get too hung up on the samurai fluff. The discipline is open to anyone who wants to use it, and you should feel free to use your imagination to branch out on the discipline's origins and philosophies in your games.

[Elricaltovilla]

You needed three to have things other styles have by default before taking feats to support your combat style

EDIT: I actually have the feeling that I am ignored by Elric, could someone confirm this for me?

No, I'm not ignoring you. Just because I don't quote you directly it doesn't mean that my responses are directed at you as much as they are at everyone else who posts in this thread. I'm a busy person and fiddling around with forum codes to properly quote people takes up valuable time I could be using on things like Disciplines, Archetypes, Prestige Classes, Feats, Items... I think you get the picture. But I'll go ahead and address your concerns specifically since you felt the need to call me out.



Yes, that's true but Quick Draw style requires you to spend feats before spending other feats on supporting your style. If you want to TWF with Mithral Current or, for example, use it with sword'n'board - you will have to spend both types of feats. Quick Draw is not a combat style on itself. It has nothing to suggest you as a reward for spent feats. That's why I want MC to be weaker that other disciplines without having feats and stronger with them.

You might see the discipline being weaker without proper investment as a good thing, but you'd be in the minority. I understand what you mean and agree to an extent, but I'd rather put things together in such a way that the style benefits from extra feats without directly penalizing someone for not having them. I prefer feats that are expansive in nature and offer new options or new twists on old tricks.

That being said, the style only needs two feats to function at near optimal efficiency. Quick Draw and Mixed Combat (lightning swap does not exist, as ErrantX and I weren't aware of Mixed Combat when I first wrote the bushi). With those feats you can draw and sheathe as a free action, and don't have to worry about provoking. Mithral Current offers support for still threatening enemies while your weapon is sheathed, allowing you to make AoOs without major issues, and I've made an attempt to expand on that feature by reworking Mithral Current Stance to better fit with the discipline goals. Some other changes will likely be implemented to help ease the burden so that we can create an entirely new fighting style from the ground up.


Also, are we going to see other ranged archetypes? Right now we have only Hawkguard, and I'd be interested to play some kind of mobile hit-and-run archer based on Harbringer, or, for example, supportive ranged combatant based on Zealot. Yes, I can do that without archetypes but they definitely help.

There will likely be more ranged stuff eventually. But I'm starting to think we should leave some stuff for Path of War 3 and Ultimate Path of War, don't you?


EDIT: Stalker'd by MC changes, reading them now

EDIT 2: Please, don't do that. Allowing the initiator to re-sheathe weapon as a part of strike is boring and makes all the Iaijutsu stuff feel like fluff - you draw and sheathe it as a part of discipline, so there's no difference between this and, for example, Scarlet Throne in feeling. In my opinion, either make going for Iaijutsu a meaningful choice when you have to lose something to receive awesome things or simply make everything draw/sheathe automatically and leave that as a weird bit of fluff

See my response above and my reply to Tempest Fury. Milo v3 also had a pretty good idea, although I might tweak it slightly based on the specific maneuvers.


EDIT 3: I am not into comparing old and new version maneuver by maneuver but as I can see, nothing really changed apart from free sheathe for most strikes and adding more stuff that gives vulnerability to silver. That's neat idea but if you want to pursue that further, add more ways (not too many but a couple would be nice) of utilizing that vulnerability without having to buy silver weapon cause I don't like being denied the choice of material :smalltongue:
Do not forget that you still have a lot of straight upgrades so there is some place for changes

Since the beginning of Mithral Current there have been several maneuvers that allow your weapon to count as silver (they usually have silver in the name).

I assume from "you have a lot of straight upgrades" you mean that there's a lot of maneuver lines in Mithral Current? That was deliberate on my part.

[Snowbluff]

Lightning Swap. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/path-of-war/feats#TOC-Lightning-Swap-Combat-)


Mixed Combat from DSP's own Psionics Unleashed lets you stow a weapon as a free action without provoking.

Biggest issue there is the BAB 6 requirement. Bushi gets it as a bonus feat at 6, but Mystics can't get it until 9. Lightning Swap from above can be taken as the 7 bonus feat, but requires a pretty hefty dex investment and has a cap.
Thank you. It does seem a bit of a steep BAB requirement, especially since Iai isn't a viable style in PF.

[Elricaltovilla]

On that note, I also don't like the Dance requirement. Yes, it makes sense with the samurai fluff, but it really doesn't make a lot of sense if you AREN'T using samurai fluff. Which, as Elric said here, is something you should feel free to do.

I try not to be harsh about these things, but I'm starting to get a little fed up here. Perform (Dance) is staying. End of Story. Plenty of martial arts use dances as part of training (Capoeira being the most notable example I think), in fact that's what a kata is.

[Dgrin]

No, I'm not ignoring you. Just because I don't quote you directly it doesn't mean that my responses are directed at you as much as they are at everyone else who posts in this thread. I'm a busy person and fiddling around with forum codes to properly quote people takes up valuable time I could be using on things like Disciplines, Archetypes, Prestige Classes, Feats, Items... I think you get the picture. But I'll go ahead and address your concerns specifically since you felt the need to call me out.

Thanks for taking your valuable time and doing that specifically for me. I am sorry that I had to ask that. My assumption was made following lack of response to my private messages and some concerns. I hope you did not take offense because of that line

[Dgrin]

You might see the discipline being weaker without proper investment as a good thing, but you'd be in the minority. I understand what you mean and agree to an extent, but I'd rather put things together in such a way that the style benefits from extra feats without directly penalizing someone for not having them. I prefer feats that are expansive in nature and offer new options or new twists on old tricks.

That being said, the style only needs two feats to function at near optimal efficiency. Quick Draw and Mixed Combat (lightning swap does not exist, as ErrantX and I weren't aware of Mixed Combat when I first wrote the bushi). With those feats you can draw and sheathe as a free action, and don't have to worry about provoking. Mithral Current offers support for still threatening enemies while your weapon is sheathed, allowing you to make AoOs without major issues, and I've made an attempt to expand on that feature by reworking Mithral Current Stance to better fit with the discipline goals. Some other changes will likely be implemented to help ease the burden so that we can create an entirely new fighting style from the ground up.


Maybe I was not clear enough on that part. There is already a way to use Mithral Current without any feat investment which is available from level one, it is called Ready the Draw. This stance should be enough for your chosen style to function with proper efficiency. And if you make a conscious choice of investing your resources into supporting it - the style itself should in my opinion be stronger than others. And if you want to use other stances and not invest any feats in you build - you deserve your maneuvers being weaker than alternative disciplines

[Snowbluff]

I try not to be harsh about these things, but I'm starting to get a little fed up here. Perform (Dance) is staying. End of Story. Plenty of martial arts use dances as part of training (Capoeira being the most notable example I think), in fact that's what a kata is.

Ugh, fine. I'll leave that be, mostly because I respect you and I have bigger fish to fry.

Like Capoeira. Calling a kata a dance is really uncalled for. There are 2 kinds of Martial Arts. One kind is for training and meditation, and the second is for beating the crap out of the other guy. Capoeira is pretty much the first, where training is an exercise and game. Kata are for learning the basics of a move in concert with movement in order to better understand how to adapt them while sparring or fighting. The skill for Kata is Perform (Weapon Drill), not Perform (Dance). Capoiera is kind of impractical, much like trying to use Iaijutsu in combat. What I'm saying is we need Capoeira as the next style. :smalltongue:

[Elricaltovilla]

Tempest Gale maneuvers have now been standardized around Sleight of Hand vs. CMD, and I've cleared up some of the wording to hopefully make it clear that the bonuses to Combat maneuvers from stances in the discipline apply to the Skill Checks.

Tempest Gale has been added to the Privateer's discipline list in place of Primal Fury and Tempest Gale has been added to the Class Templates document.

Still more updates to come barring the apocalypse.

[Powerdork]

> When recovering maneuvers as a full round action, the warder sets up a defensive perimeter around himself to defend her allies, increasing her threatened area by 5 ft. for every 5 initiator levels she possesses.

A hypothetical warlord 1/stalker 1/zealot 1/mystic 1/harbinger 1/war soul soulknife 1/pathwalker psychic warrior 1/monk of the silver fist 1/initiator paladin 1/initiator anything 1/warder 10 with Martial Training I (any discipline assuming stat of +10) has initiator levels 10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10/15/20 for a whopping +135 ft reach. I advise inserting a reference to warder, or the word "highest," so nobody pulls cheese like that in any game, even the most wording-abusive. Feel free to suggest alternate solutions.

[squiggit]

Yeah I'd say the issue is less about investment and more one of whether that investment pays for itself. Spending three feats is acceptable. Spending three feats and ending up not any better than the other damage disciplines that can work with one or zero feats feels iffy.


Also I've decided I don't actually mind Perform. My issue was more that a lot of the classes don't have a lot of skill points and stuff like perform don't give you much. Mystic takes SM and MC and he's got as many skill points as a fighter left for practical stuff. Flux and Hourglass both have useful associated skills, but add those and now you've got nothing to spare and only one skill that fills a traditional skill/support role.

[Elricaltovilla]

> When recovering maneuvers as a full round action, the warder sets up a defensive perimeter around himself to defend her allies, increasing her threatened area by 5 ft. for every 5 initiator levels she possesses.

A hypothetical warlord 1/stalker 1/zealot 1/mystic 1/harbinger 1/war soul soulknife 1/pathwalker psychic warrior 1/monk of the silver fist 1/initiator paladin 1/initiator anything 1/warder 10 with Martial Training I (any discipline assuming stat of +10) has initiator levels 10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10/10/15/20 for a whopping +135 ft reach. I advise inserting a reference to warder, or the word "highest," so nobody pulls cheese like that in any game, even the most wording-abusive. Feel free to suggest alternate solutions.

My alternate solution would be to let that happen, cuz its awesome.

But since that would be "bad" read Initiator Level as "Warder Initiator Level," since each classes' initiator level is counted separately.

[Vhaidara]

Also I've decided I don't actually mind Perform. My issue was more that a lot of the classes don't have a lot of skill points and stuff like perform don't give you much. Mystic takes SM and MC and he's got as many skill points as a fighter left for practical stuff. Flux and Hourglass both have useful associated skills, but add those and now you've got nothing to spare and only one skill that fills a traditional skill/support role.

Yeah, Elric, this was also where my issue was arising: The fact that it truly is a tax, since it isn't useful for any purpose other than MC maneuvers. It's the only discipline skill that falls into that category, and the fact that it is solved by a feat (Agile Dancer) was seriously being exacerbated by the fact that MC, as it stands, is a very feat intensive discipline to build a character around (especially if you aren't using Bushi, which has a lot of fluff implications attached to it's mechanics)

[Elricaltovilla]

Tempest Gale Style feats have been added, as well as a little present for Mystics (or anyone using Mithral Current and Elemental Flux).

[Fenryr]

Oi, Elric! The "free" sheathe weapon is for anyone takin' Mithral Current without Bushi, right? That's quite the elegant solution.

I may be wrong buy my favorite maneuver Quicksilver Wave does no silver damage now and gives enemies silver dislike (fluff says otherwise). The only ones that do silver damage now are Mithral Flash, Mithral Lightning Stance and Truesilver Tsunami. Is that intended? Only two strikes and a stance? I know a silver weapon is cheap at later levels and there are alchemical solutions but right now in our group we are in the middle of a shipwreck so ... Yeah, not gettin' silver anytime soon.

[Elricaltovilla]

Oi, Elric! The "free" sheathe weapon is for anyone takin' Mithral Current without Bushi, right? That's quite the elegant solution.

I may be wrong buy my favorite maneuver Quicksilver Wave does no silver damage now and gives enemies silver dislike (fluff says otherwise). The only ones that do silver damage now are Mithral Flash, Mithral Lightning Stance and Truesilver Tsunami. Is that intended? Only two strikes and a stance? I know a silver weapon is cheap at later levels and there are alchemical solutions but right now in our group we are in the middle of a shipwreck so ... Yeah, not gettin' silver anytime soon.

Yeah, we decided that the discipline needed to be less feat intensive.

I did trade silver damage for silver vulnerability on the Wave maneuvers, because there was call for more silver vulnerability stuff. I can't really account for every situation, and while I'd like to add more silver strikes I think that in most games getting a mithral weapon or alchemical silver is easy enough that I can't make a special case for it. I might be tweaking the Mithral Current Style feats later today, so we'll see where that goes.

[Tempestfury]

Tempest Gale Style and its upgrades are... decent enough I suppose. Elemental Current is a pretty damn awesome feat however. Wondering how it interacts with immunities and the like however

So does a Mithral Weapon count as silver for damage reduction?

[Elricaltovilla]

Tempest Gale Style and its upgrades are... decent enough I suppose. Elemental Current is a pretty damn awesome feat however. Wondering how it interacts with immunities and the like however

So does a Mithral Weapon count as silver for damage reduction?

Yes, mithral weapons count as silver. That's core Pathfinder.

[Tempestfury]

Yes, mithral weapons count as silver. That's core Pathfinder.

Never come up before, but that's cool. Mithral is also known as silvered steel.

[Elricaltovilla]

Two traits have been added to the Feats document. Here they are below:


Practiced Initiator: Pick an Initiating class-- your initiator level in that class gains a +2 trait bonus as long as this bonus does not raise your initiator level above your current Hit Dice.

Unorthodox Method: You may trade one of your classes disciplines known for a different discipline known of your choice. You lose the old discipline's skill as a class skill but gain the new discipline's skill as a class skill.

[Tempestfury]

Very nice. With archetypes, traditions and now traits, its easy to create combinations that you desire.

[Snowbluff]

Practiced Initiator: Pick an Initiating class-- your initiator level in that class gains a +2 trait bonus as long as this bonus does not raise your initiator level above your current Hit Dice. Oh man. >:D


Unorthodox Method: You may trade one of your classes disciplines known for a different discipline known of your choice. You lose the old discipline's skill as a class skill but gain the new discipline's skill as a class skill.


Interesting. Losing a skill is a weird option, since some of them are common skills that cover basic abilities. :smalltongue:

[Vhaidara]

Two traits have been added to the Feats document. Here they are below:


Practiced Initiator: Pick an Initiating class-- your initiator level in that class gains a +2 trait bonus as long as this bonus does not raise your initiator level above your current Hit Dice.

Unorthodox Method: You may trade one of your classes disciplines known for a different discipline known of your choice. You lose the old discipline's skill as a class skill but gain the new discipline's skill as a class skill.


I think this brings an issue that hasn't been addressed back up: Can we get a clause saying that, if you have access to a discipline, the associated discipline skill is a class skill? Otherwise, this leads to awkward things like Dervish Defender Warders who use the trait to swap out Broken Blade for something else not having Acrobatics as a class skill, despite still having Thrashing Dragon.

[Ilorin Lorati]

While we're talking about traits, last year someone recommended (http://dreamscarredpress.com/dragonfly/ForumsPro/viewtopic/t=3359.html) a trait that would allow you to add a weapon to a discipline's weapons list. I've been using it for a while in my personal games, and I haven't been able to find any place where it's too strong. I did end up cleaning it up as thus:


Cross-School Style (Combat)
Benefit: Choose a single type of weapon and a martial discipline. That weapon counts as a discipline weapon for the chosen discipline. This does not let you initiate a maneuver that requires a specific type of weapon or circumstance.


Any chance this or something like it could be added? It would allow a nice amount of reflavoring for certain disciplines without allowing use with things that wouldn't have been already usable anyways.

Edit: Also, any chance for a Martial Training version of the Practiced Initiator trait? I understand it may come out as too strong considering the limitations of the feats, but it would be nice to have.

[Eox]

Yep: 10chars

While I like this in theory, it does cause a bit of a problem with full casters (Who often have the feats to spare) being able to drop 2-3 feats for some powerful counters/boosts. For example, a cleric or druid (Any wisdom caster really) can take enough Martial Training/Advanced Studies to pick up the new Riven Hourglass 9th by level 17 and theoretically cast 2 spells per round, 4 with quicken.

I mean, it's hilarious. But it might be an issue.

[Vhaidara]

Maybe, instead of Martial Training being based on character level, it could be based on BAB? The should stop casters from picking up 9th level maneuvers through feats.

Maybe include a line that allows some classes (magus, for example) to count as full BAB during that calculation?

[Ilorin Lorati]

For example, a cleric or druid (Any wisdom caster really) can take enough Martial Training/Advanced Studies to pick up the new Riven Hourglass 9th by level 17 and theoretically cast 2 spells per round, 4 with quicken.

Remember that martial training doesn't provide a method of recovery, and additional feats would be required to gain them. Are we talking about Break the Hourglass (I don't see any other potential 9th for RH that's a counter/boost)? Because it uses an immediate action, and doesn't provide an additional swift; you'd still only be able to get the two spellcasts in.

[Vhaidara]

Oh, and one thing I noticed: Sands of Time Stance is REALLY, REALLY good for a caster to pick up through Martial Training. Free Extend on any personal buffs? That stacks with Extend? Yes please.

I would include some kind of limiter on what it can affect. Right now it can even work on Time Stop

[Eox]

Remember that martial training doesn't provide a method of recovery, and additional feats would be required to gain them. Are we talking about Break the Hourglass (I don't see any other potential 9th for RH that's a counter/boost)? Because it uses an immediate action, and doesn't provide an additional swift; you'd still only be able to get the two spellcasts in.

I mean the proposed (and tweaked) new 9th from a couple pages back. I can't remember if it has a stacking clause or not, but a full caster could keep spending the standard to recover the spent maneuver while his double keeps casting and summoning another one, who keeps casting and summoning another one, etc.

A cleric likely had some way to evade the age/unconsciousness penalties too.

[Snowbluff]

Maybe, instead of Martial Training being based on character level, it could be based on BAB? The should stop casters from picking up 9th level maneuvers through feats.

Maybe include a line that allows some classes (magus, for example) to count as full BAB during that calculation?

MEEEEEEEEEEEEH.

If they want to spend their feats on something other than sacred geo, let them. For a guy who dislikes taxes, you sure do enjoy arbitrary limitations.

[meemaas]

Maybe, instead of Martial Training being based on character level, it could be based on BAB? The should stop casters from picking up 9th level maneuvers through feats.

Maybe include a line that allows some classes (magus, for example) to count as full BAB during that calculation?

Honestly, I want to see Errata placed on Martial Training to lock them into a specific maximum level of maneuvers independent of their initiator level. Add on a clause preventing Advanced Study from bypassing that limit and we'd be golden.

[Ilorin Lorati]

@Eox,

It's a full round action to recover maneuvers gained from martial training. Really, if anything it says more about the specific maneuver (this one? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18993937&postcount=1044)) than the full caster that can abuse it. I would highly recommend adding a caveat that clones can't initiate it.

[Snowbluff]

It's a full round action to recover maneuvers gained from martial training. Really, if anything it says more about the specific maneuver (this one? (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18993937&postcount=1044)) than the full caster that can abuse it. I would highly recommend adding a caveat that clones can't initiate it.

That's an exception. The problem is that other feats suck.

[squiggit]

Oh man. >:D


Interesting. Losing a skill is a weird option, since some of them are common skills that cover basic abilities. :smalltongue:

Yeah this is one I've been struggling with. Swaps that should be simple ("I'm not dual wielding or using a bow so I'm dumping Solar Wind/Thrashing Dragon) suddenly turn into bad ideas because you're losing nice, generalist skills and not necessarily gaining something as nice in return.

It's also especially silly for classes with redundant skills: If a stalker trades out broken blade for, I don't know, cursed razor, they lose Acrobatics even though they still have Thrashing Dragon. Vice versa too. Ditto in reverse. My favorite is Dervish Defender Warder, which tells you you trade bluff for acrobatics... while still having acrobatics from broken blade.

Of course, it's worst for people looking to pick up Shattered Mirror or Mithral Current, because those skills have generally no practical use at all, so losing something like Perception hurts even more.

[Snowbluff]

I think if they simply allowed for redundant skill coverage, it would be better. However, I'm not to bothered by the way it is now. It's not meant to be your primary method of earning schools, unlike classes or traditions.

Of course, it could be balanced by just removing the skill loss; you already lose a school, and your net gain is a single skill that way. Earning a skill is typical benefit of a trait.

[Vhaidara]

MEEEEEEEEEEEEH.

If they want to spend their feats on something other than sacred geo, let them. For a guy who dislikes taxes, you sure do enjoy arbitrary limitations.

Given that this is designed to stop 9th level casters from being able to access 9th level maneuvers with a 3 feat investment (Martial Training I gets you 2 maneuvers, Advanced Training gets you 2 more, Second advanced training gets you a 9th), yes. Also, I don't feel like full casters deserve more nice things. Note that I made allowance for martial focused 3/4 BAB classes.

It isn't something that would ever come up in my games, because all 9th level casters are banned (we use Spherecasting)

[Snowbluff]

Given that this is designed to stop 9th level casters from being able to access 9th level maneuvers with a 3 feat investment (Martial Training I gets you 2 maneuvers, Advanced Training gets you 2 more, Second advanced training gets you a 9th), yes. Also, I don't feel like full casters deserve more nice things. Note that I made allowance for martial focused 3/4 BAB classes.

It isn't something that would ever come up in my games, because all 9th level casters are banned (we use Spherecasting)

This doesn't fall under "casters don't deserve nice things," this falls under "I hate wizards." Clerics and Druids are still able to use these feats. So are summoners. Compared to their other options, this would only be cutting their interesting options rather than their strictly more powerful ones. There's no point to adding BAB restrictions to these feats. You would have accomplished nothing other an arbitrary restriction that affect everyone's games but yours. EDIT: Not to mention multiclass builds that use 3/4 classes. Multiclassing hurts enough under PF.

IL restrictions probably need to be reworked considering this.

[Powerdork]

Doesn't Advanced Study already require 4 levels in a martial adept class (per Path of War 1)? How is any Martial Training chump getting it?

[RedOndjage]

So, a few questions for a PoW dev!

One: for the Silver Crane maneuvers that inflict sacred damage, does the entire strike count as Sacred damage? Or just the added bonus dice?

Two: Why don't the maneuvers Argent Knight's Banner and Argent King's Scepter inflict sacred damage? Was that an oversight, or intentional?

Third: The Knight Disciple archetype makes no modification to the Paladin's level 20 ability that allows the paladin to always heal for a full amount when he uses lay on hands or channel positive energy. Should that be changed to have some interaction with their healing strikes and lay on hands replacement?

Edited in Fourth: Holy Pinions and Celestial Pinions both say they inflict sacred damage in the short text, but the long text makes no mention of this. Which type of damage do they inflict?

[Ilorin Lorati]

Doesn't Advanced Study already require 4 levels in a martial adept class (per Path of War 1)? How is any Martial Training chump getting it?

I suppose it's possible that Gareth was wrong about it, and at best they're underestimating feats required (as picking a maneuver outside of what's available to your class only gives you one maneuver not two), but until said otherwise I'm going to go with what he said.

[MilleniaAntares]

Yep: 10chars
Oh, I see! Well, that will be useful, should my games ever last higher than level 11.

[ErrantX]

Advanced Study (Combat)

You've delved deeper into your martial learning to find new skills.

Prerequisite(s): Martial disciple of 4th level or higher.

Benefit(s): You may select two maneuvers or one stance from your class's list of disciplines and add them to your known maneuvers and stances. You must meet all prerequisites for the new maneuvers or stance to qualify for you to learn them. You may select maneuvers from a discipline that is not in class to you with this feat; doing so reduces the effectiveness of this feat to one maneuver or stance of your choice from an out of class discipline.

Special: You may select this feat multiple times.

Not applicable with Martial Training. Lord Gareth is wrong. Emphasis mine. Taking Martial Training does not make you a Martial Disciple, those are Harbinger, Zealot, Mystic, Walord, Warder, and Stalker. Initiator archetype classes count as well (such as Pathwalker and War Soul), so they can pick up Advanced Study to gain access to higher level maneuvers than their class normally would allow by trading valuable feats. A Wizard picking up Martial Training 1 and 2 (Riven Hourglass), getting a +10 Int modifier and getting high level Riven Hourglass is not a valid use of the rules.

-X

[Ilorin Lorati]

Confusion cleared up and case closed. Thanks, X.

[Eox]

Not applicable with Martial Training. Lord Gareth is wrong. Emphasis mine. Taking Martial Training does not make you a Martial Disciple, those are Harbinger, Zealot, Mystic, Walord, Warder, and Stalker. Initiator archetype classes count as well (such as Pathwalker and War Soul), so they can pick up Advanced Study to gain access to higher level maneuvers than their class normally would allow by trading valuable feats. A Wizard picking up Martial Training 1 and 2 (Riven Hourglass), getting a +10 Int modifier and getting high level Riven Hourglass is not a valid use of the rules.

-X

Damn it, I was about to make an example Bearstorm druid.

[Ilorin Lorati]

Damn it, I was about to make an example Bearstorm druid.

Warpaths may still allow it for Druids unless there's been a change there I've not been made aware of.

[Powerdork]

A Wizard picking up Martial Training 1 and 2 (Riven Hourglass), getting a +10 Int modifier and getting high level Riven Hourglass is not a valid use of the rules.

This is true, but not just for the reason you'd expect. Riven Hourglass, with its discipline skill of Autohypnosis, is keyed to Wisdom. A wizard would need to be level 17, have a +9 Wisdom modifier (which, let's be realistic, is easy to achieve while still being a god wizard), and then spend their feat on Advanced Study (which they can't, due to prerequisites).

Perhaps errata would patch this up? "Prerequisites: 4th level in a class with maneuvers as a class feature"?

[Ilorin Lorati]

Perhaps errata would patch this up? "Prerequisites: 4th level in a class with maneuvers as a class feature"?

No, he's right; I double checked, and a disciple is defined in PoW as a member of specific classes that grant maneuvers. If anything, the wording in the book is too restrictive based on his commentary, and leaves out partial initiator archetypes:


Martial disciples are those who have taken the stalker, warder, or warlord classes, and all others must learn martial maneuvers through training (such as by taking feats) or through specific training in their class (by taking up an archetype).

Edit: A better wording for PoW:E or a future "UPoW" compilation may be this:


Martial disciples are those who have taken levels in a class that grants martial maneuvers, either through base class features (such as the stalker, warder, and warlord classes) or through an archetype or other option that grants them (such as the War Soul Soulknife archetype or an Insquistor taking a Warpath).

Even this would end up cutting out Alchemist from counting, which is honestly the most damning thing I've heard about the way the maneuver extracts work for them.

[MilleniaAntares]

For Elemental Flux (https://docs.google.com/document/d/14BiQj1sEeeEH0Nbyiyf-o0Kg4N5uDM5XwwqeWOJ21dI/edit), the following maneuvers' animus augmentations specify that more than one point can be spent, but does not specify how the augmentation scales:

Elemental Strike: "Animus augmentation: You may spend one or more points of animus (max 3) to increase the initial damage of this strike by 1d6 and increase the DC to save against the strike by +1."

Energy Hammer: "Animus augmentation: You may spend one or more points of animus (max 3) to increase the initial damage of this strike by 1d6 and increase the DC to save against the strike by +1."

Elemental Vortex Attack: "Animus augmentation: You may spend one or more points of animus (max 3) to increase the initial damage of this strike by 1d6 and increase the DC to save against the strike by +1."

Eldritch Energy Hammer: "Animus augmentation: You may spend one or more points of animus (max 3) to add +2 to your dispel check."

Redirecting Flux: "Animus augmentation: You may spend one or more points of animus (max 3) to increase your Spellcraft check by +2."

Zephyr Flux: "Animus augmentation: You may spend one or more points of animus (max 3) to increase the initial damage of this strike by 1d6 and increase the DC to save against the strike by +1."

Strike of Elemental Devastation: "Animus augmentation: You may spend one or more points of animus (max 3) to increase the initial damage of each ray from this strike by 10 and increase the DC to save against the strike by +1."

[Eox]

Reason #2 to add a limit of 1 duplicate: A warder who grabs Riven Hourglass can duplicate every round, recovering the maneuver by spamming defensive focus. If all the clones are doing it, they can duplicate as well. This means that within a few rounds there will be a small army of angry, exponentially duplicating dudes in heavy armour rushing towards anyone who provokes an AoO, an exploit I officially dub "The Return of the Knights of the Roxbury"

e: the right teamwork feats and the Zweihander Sentinel archetype make this extra fun
e2: I should note that you're gonna have to play something immune to unconsciousness somehow or flat out something immune to aging effects.

[Powerdork]

And I've officially lost my enthusiasm for the project. Have fun, folks.


By the way, it turns out anyone with a 1-level dip in stalker, warlord or warder qualifies for Advanced Study at character level 4, now that that's been cleared up!

[Anlashok]

This isn't a new idea, but it bears repeating:

Class Skills should be separated from initiating skills.

Give every class their own class skill list that makes sense, then add a clause "Classes gain the associated skill of every discipline available to them as class skills".

Because having a warlord that can't talk to people because I don't want golden lion or a stalker that's blind as a bat because he's not an archer is silly.



By the way, it turns out anyone with a 1-level dip in stalker, warlord or warder qualifies for Advanced Study at character level 4, now that that's been cleared up!
I can't see any language that even remotely suggests a stalker 1/cleric 3 counts as a stalker 4.

[Jurai]

Brew idea struck me, and I figured I'd work something out for the project. Can I get in the credits?

[Doomeye56]

Reason #2 to add a limit of 1 duplicate: A warder who grabs Riven Hourglass can duplicate every round, recovering the maneuver by spamming defensive focus. If all the clones are doing it, they can duplicate as well. This means that within a few rounds there will be a small army of angry, exponentially duplicating dudes in heavy armour rushing towards anyone who provokes an AoO, an exploit I officially dub "The Return of the Knights of the Roxbury"

e: the right teamwork feats and the Zweihander Sentinel archetype make this extra fun
e2: I should note that you're gonna have to play something immune to unconsciousness somehow or flat out something immune to aging effects.

Then the warder is left useless for X amount of time as he sleeps off all the amassed time advancement from the maneuver.

[Tempestfury]

Then the warder is left useless for X amount of time as he sleeps off all the amassed time advancement from the maneuver.

Oooor the DM can just kill him off.

[Vhaidara]

Reason #2 to add a limit of 1 duplicate: A warder who grabs Riven Hourglass can duplicate every round, recovering the maneuver by spamming defensive focus. If all the clones are doing it, they can duplicate as well. This means that within a few rounds there will be a small army of angry, exponentially duplicating dudes in heavy armour rushing towards anyone who provokes an AoO, an exploit I officially dub "The Return of the Knights of the Roxbury"

e: the right teamwork feats and the Zweihander Sentinel archetype make this extra fun
e2: I should note that you're gonna have to play something immune to unconsciousness somehow or flat out something immune to aging effects.

This is why I feel that it should stack upon you as they end, and that it should be death at the end if you go past venerable. And the aging should fall off one step at a time. I want this to be an option, as a suicide gambit

[Doomeye56]

This is why I feel that it should stack upon you as they end, and that it should be death at the end if you go past venerable. And the aging should fall off one step at a time. I want this to be an option, as a suicide gambit

I agree they should stack and if death isnt an option then be stuck doing a reverse Rip Van Winkle if you pass venerable.

[Kaidinah]

I think if the stances offer a free action sheathe once per round, you shouldn't need many of the strikes to allow you to sheathe your weapon after using it. That way, you can decide between using Mithral Current stances in order to ensure you can always draw your weapon when making a Mithral Current strike, or picking up a feat and allowing you to sheathe your weapons more effectively in order to be able to use other stances.
I agree. I'd rather it be tied to the stances only for the same reason.

As for the fighter archetype ErrantX mentioned, I would rather it be compatible with other fighter archetypes than have grit. If it was compatible with other archetypes and had grit that would be ideal.

[Snowbluff]

This is why I feel that it should stack upon you as they end, and that it should be death at the end if you go past venerable. And the aging should fall off one step at a time. I want this to be an option, as a suicide gambit

I agree, it would be cool if it was good in moderation, but OP if you kill yourself. :smalltongue:

[master4sword]

Of course, it could be balanced by just removing the skill loss; you already lose a school, and your net gain is a single skill that way. Earning a skill is typical benefit of a trait.

I second this.

[Powerdork]

I can't see any language that even remotely suggests a stalker 1/cleric 3 counts as a stalker 4.

No, see, they are a martial disciple ("Martial disciples are those who have taken the stalker, warder, or warlord classes") who is 4th level or higher.

[Tempestfury]

No, see, they are a martial disciple ("Martial disciples are those who have taken the stalker, warder, or warlord classes") who is 4th level or higher.

But they aren't a martial discipline OF 4th level or higher. (A level 4 Martial Adept)

[Powerdork]

But they aren't a martial discipline OF 4th level or higher. (A level 4 Martial Adept)

This kind of confusion is exactly why martial disciples and Advanced Study need to be redefined.

[Tempestfury]

This kind of confusion is exactly why martial disciples and Advanced Study need to be redefined.

Well, no. There is no confusion. Your just being pedantic.

[Forrestfire]

Given that the book calls out the ability to be a multiclass Martial Disciple, and also notes it as different from Initiator Level, there actually is an issue there. It may be pedantic, but so are many important catchings of rules holes.

"We don't need tight wording, and if you're confused you're just being pedantic" is a terrible way to playtest rules, and honestly, if you didn't have your sig, I'd have assumed you were being sarcastic, because I would have thought there was no way a player if Pathfinder/3.x that cares enough about new rules to take part in a playtest thread would have such an opinion. :smallconfused: :smallsigh:

[Ilorin Lorati]

I can definitely see the need for tightening up the language as stated in my earlier comment about what a martial disciple is defined as, and I can certainly see where legitimate confusion could be coming into play in regards to what a Martial Disciple is and how it relates to levels - but I also don't think Metool was actually confused in this case. If he was, he wouldn't have hidden the comment behind a white font.

[Powerdork]

I also don't think Metool was actually confused in this case. If he was, he wouldn't have hidden the comment behind a white font.

I thought I was done with the thread, and I thought my reading was correct (because I apparently didn't have a grasp of the rules at the time).

[Ilorin Lorati]

I stand corrected; my apologies.

X, I have another question for you in regards to what a Disciple is defined as: would a character that uses Martial Training and goes into an initiator PrC such as Bladecaster count as a Disciple or not?

[ErrantX]

A martial disciple is defined by someone who gets maneuvers as a class feature with included recovery method, and not solely through investment of feats. This will be added to the errata. A magus who qualifies for Bladecaster, for example, with Martial Training does not count for the purposes of Advanced Study. They may add their maneuvers they got from feats by the class, but that does not make them a martial disciple. They are martial initiators, yes, but the status of disciple is granted through a base class.

Advanced study was intended for a character who possesses four or more levels in a class that qualifies as a martial disciple (i.e. initiator archetypes for core classes, and the PoW signature six classes).

-X

[Ilorin Lorati]

A martial disciple is defined by someone who gets maneuvers as a class feature with included recovery method, and not solely through investment of feats. This will be added to the errata.

Don't take this as looking for loopholes (I want the rules to be as consistent as everyone else, that's all), but by this wording Bladecaster would count since it gains both a recovery method and maneuvers as class features. If this is what you're going for, a different wording is probably warranted.

I will, however, ask why you think Bladecaster et. al. shouldn't count. They're dedicating at least two feats and up to half their class levels (or more, depending on if they go into another PrC) to the usage of martial maneuvers. Why are they treated different than someone who just takes a few levels of a base class and then goes somewhere else?

[ErrantX]

Don't take this as looking for loopholes (I want the rules to be as consistent as everyone else, that's all), but by this wording Bladecaster would count since it gains both a recovery method and maneuvers as class features. If this is what you're going for, a different wording is probably warranted.

I will, however, ask why you think Bladecaster et. al. shouldn't count. They're dedicating at least two feats and up to half their class levels (or more, depending on if they go into another PrC) to the usage of martial maneuvers. Why are they treated different than someone who just takes a few levels of a base class and then goes somewhere else?

Because I didn't want someone to dump two feats into Martial Training 1 and 2 and then get a 9th level maneuver when I feel that they didn't earn it by taking classes that advance maneuvers as their thing. It's like taking 9th level spells or powers as a feat.

-X

[Ilorin Lorati]

That's... not at all what I'm talking about, though. I understand and actually agree with that assessment, despite my general disinclination to have such limitations (simply too strong for a handful of feats).

I'm asking specifically about people who take class levels in the PrCs that provide maneuvers. They're definitely not just getting 9th level anything as a feat, they're dedicating class levels just like the base classes would.

[RedOndjage]

ErrantX, or whoever else it may concern, just incase you missed it from further upthread:


So, a few questions for a PoW dev!

One: for the Silver Crane maneuvers that inflict sacred damage, does the entire strike count as Sacred damage? Or just the added bonus dice?

Two: Why don't the maneuvers Argent Knight's Banner and Argent King's Scepter inflict sacred damage? Was that an oversight, or intentional?

Third: The Knight Disciple archetype makes no modification to the Paladin's level 20 ability that allows the paladin to always heal for a full amount when he uses lay on hands or channel positive energy. Should that be changed to have some interaction with their healing strikes and lay on hands replacement?

Edited in Fourth: Holy Pinions and Celestial Pinions both say they inflict sacred damage in the short text, but the long text makes no mention of this. Which type of damage do they inflict?

[ErrantX]

That's... not at all what I'm talking about, though. I understand and actually agree with that assessment, despite my general disinclination to have such limitations (simply too strong for a handful of feats).

I'm asking specifically about people who take class levels in the PrCs that provide maneuvers. They're definitely not just getting 9th level anything as a feat, they're dedicating class levels just like the base classes would.

Because it muddies the waters as to declaring who or who isn't a martial disciple or not and who qualifies for Advanced Study. I'm generally not inclined to break the game by introducing unnecessary limits either, but this is one I feel that's important to keep, broken hearts or not.

The Prestige Classes help both kinds of people, and Advanced Study is there for those who have dedicated the training time (read as: 4 levels or more) of a martial disciple base class. For those who say, dip 1 level of warder to go into wizard and then hit Bladecaster, they don't qualify because they have a terrifically split focus that obviously bends towards wizardry. That's fine, allowed and cool, but you don't qualify for Advanced Study because you just don't have the time put in. The level 8 stalker / level 4 dragon fury does, because he's put in the work to form a strong base as a stalker.


ErrantX, or whoever else it may concern, just incase you missed it from further upthread:

So, a few questions for a PoW dev!

One: for the Silver Crane maneuvers that inflict sacred damage, does the entire strike count as Sacred damage? Or just the added bonus dice?

Two: Why don't the maneuvers Argent Knight's Banner and Argent King's Scepter inflict sacred damage? Was that an oversight, or intentional?

Third: The Knight Disciple archetype makes no modification to the Paladin's level 20 ability that allows the paladin to always heal for a full amount when he uses lay on hands or channel positive energy. Should that be changed to have some interaction with their healing strikes and lay on hands replacement?

Edited in Fourth: Holy Pinions and Celestial Pinions both say they inflict sacred damage in the short text, but the long text makes no mention of this. Which type of damage do they inflict?


Crane bonus damage is sacred, but the weapon damage is still whatever it is, just like adding fire damage to a weapon through flaming enchantment.
Intentional (likely), because those were healing ones and I didn't want to make the entire discipline one damage type.
It probably should be, I'll bring that up with the author of that. Thank you.
That's a mistake that will hit errata. Sacred damage.



-X

[Ilorin Lorati]

I can't say I agree, but I respect your clarifications. Thank you.

In line of the clarified rules, do you think it would be permissable to have a feat or an option to allow a character with Martial Training to gain additional maneuvers with the caveat that they're limited by the maximum level of maneuvers provided to them by the Martial Training line?

[Eldaran]

Where exactly is the errata for Path of War? The book has been out for awhile so I assume it must be somewhere, but I can't find it. Can you link it?

[Elricaltovilla]

We don't have errata for Path of War yet. We're gathering up issues in order to put together an errata doc though.

[ErrantX]

Where exactly is the errata for Path of War? The book has been out for awhile so I assume it must be somewhere, but I can't find it. Can you link it?

Currently in house because we've been splitting attention between new material and scooping up problems with the old as they arise. I'll make it a priority for this week and post it.

-X

[Tempestfury]

... Random question but in the future, do you plan to make archetypes for the new hybrids classes? Or even make hybrid classes yourselves?

[Ilorin Lorati]

Tempest, I can answer that one. They've said they won't be for this book.

[ErrantX]

I can't say I agree, but I respect your clarifications. Thank you.

In line of the clarified rules, do you think it would be permissable to have a feat or an option to allow a character with Martial Training to gain additional maneuvers with the caveat that they're limited by the maximum level of maneuvers provided to them by the Martial Training line?

By all means message me in private and I'd love to discuss the issue further, I'm by no means a closed door. If given evidence that I'm wrong or something needs to change, I can be moved to fix it without too much problem. I don't want a broken or bad product. This goes for everyone, I don't mind responding to private messages as well and don't think I'm against changes.

As far as a feat for that for Martial Training? Yeah, so long as its sticking within its boundary of 6th level or lower. I think that's fine, if a bit feat intensive.

-X

[Tempestfury]

Tempest, I can answer that one. They've said they won't be for this book.

Hence why I said in the 'future'. You know, not currently?

[ErrantX]

I honestly can't say whether or not we'll address the hybrid classes or not in the future. That's an up in the air sort of thing right now. I can say we're not for this book, but for future PoW expansions, I can't say we won't because we may have the ideas to do so then.

Sorry for the non-answer answer, but for now, progress forward as a no-to-maybe.

-X

[Tempestfury]

Alright understood. I don't mind to much as it was simple curiosity.

[meemaas]

I'm curious, what's happening with the warpaths? I remember them being scrapped as currently presented so I'm wondering if the team has gotten to a better implementation?

[Elricaltovilla]

I'm curious, what's happening with the warpaths? I remember them being scrapped as currently presented so I'm wondering if the team has gotten to a better implementation?

Still under development. I'm waiting to get some more eyes on it before rolling out the new warpaths for you all.

[AGrinningCat]

Are older Archetypes going to be looked at? I got a bone to pick with the Paladin one.

Additionally I got someone trying to tell me that you can use Scarlet Einhander stance with a 2hander due to the opening blurb on page 82, despite the stance explicitly calling out a 1hander on a page over. Can I get some clarification?

[Elricaltovilla]

Are older Archetypes going to be looked at? I got a bone to pick with the Paladin one.


Potentially, provided there's a major issue. I'm aware of the issue with the Paladin Capstone, should get that fixed this week. Is there anything else I need to review with the archetype?

[squiggit]

Are older Archetypes going to be looked at? I got a bone to pick with the Paladin one.

Additionally I got someone trying to tell me that you can use Scarlet Einhander stance with a 2hander due to the opening blurb on page 82, despite the stance explicitly calling out a 1hander on a page over. Can I get some clarification?

As written: No. You can't use the stance with a two-hander. Yes, page 82 tells you that you need to have a free hand or be using a two-hander to use scarlet throne stuff, but in the context of the stance all that means is you can't TWF with the stance. The text says "melee weapon in one hand" and nothing else.

So your someone is wrong. Though I suspect that you're supposed to be able to use a two hander with the stance, the text doesn't let you right now.

[AGrinningCat]

Potentially, provided there's a major issue. I'm aware of the issue with the Paladin Capstone, should get that fixed this week. Is there anything else I need to review with the archetype?

Namely in that I don't feel the power trade is lateral. I wanted to do a proper write up for it, but I haven't had the time since I have finals (tomorrow) and I'm trying to finish something to present for the akashic side of the house.

The quick and dirty revolves around the paladins out-of-combat role, and how the loss of both spells and Lay on Hands prevents her from keeping the party functioning. Guardian's shield isn't strong enough to fill the role of Lay on Hands.

[CGNefarious]

As written: No. You can't use the stance with a two-hander. Yes, page 82 tells you that you need to have a free hand or be using a two-hander to use scarlet throne stuff, but in the context of the stance all that means is you can't TWF with the stance. The text says "melee weapon in one hand" and nothing else.

So your someone is wrong. Though I suspect that you're supposed to be able to use a two hander with the stance, the text doesn't let you right now.

Yeah, the text of the maneuver makes it pretty clear that you have to be holding a weapon in one hand (unless this is some shenanigans like if you're holding a weapon in two hands you're also holding it in one hand). It kind of sucks for me, as I would have loved for my Zweihander Sentinel to use Scarlet Throne, but he wields a greatsword and one of the best early stances is useless for him. The fluff for Scarlet Throne is awesome though, and I can understand why they'd have that restriction.

[squiggit]

Yeah, the text of the maneuver makes it pretty clear that you have to be holding a weapon in one hand (unless this is some shenanigans like if you're holding a weapon in two hands you're also holding it in one hand). It kind of sucks for me, as I would have loved for my Zweihander Sentinel to use Scarlet Throne, but he wields a greatsword and one of the best early stances is useless for him. The fluff for Scarlet Throne is awesome though, and I can understand why they'd have that restriction.

Yeah. But like I said, first guess is that it's supposed to one with two handers. Back in one of the playtests the stance was called "scarlet zweihander" and had a slightly different set of buffs. The short description says that it works "when attacking with one weapon" rather than "a weapon in one hand" and it seems odd that a discipline would have a key stance that only works for one of its fighting styles. It'd be like Solar Wind having stances that only worked with guns.

[NineThePuma]

The quick and dirty revolves around the paladins out-of-combat role, and how the loss of both spells and Lay on Hands prevents her from keeping the party functioning. Guardian's shield isn't strong enough to fill the role of Lay on Hands.

What's the paladin's out of combat role, as you see it? Personally, I've never seen them as a primary or even secondary healer, so you saying that Lay on Hands is iconic to it feels weird to me.

[Powerdork]

Yeah, the text of the maneuver makes it pretty clear that you have to be holding a weapon in one hand (unless this is some shenanigans like if you're holding a weapon in two hands you're also holding it in one hand). It kind of sucks for me, as I would have loved for my Zweihander Sentinel to use Scarlet Throne, but he wields a greatsword and one of the best early stances is useless for him. The fluff for Scarlet Throne is awesome though, and I can understand why they'd have that restriction.

If it's the defensive stance I remembered, note you can take a hand off your weapon as a free action. Chat with your GM.

[AGrinningCat]

so you saying that Lay on Hands is iconic to it feels weird to me.

Iconic?:smallconfused:

Paladin's roles are arguable, but I'm going to throw out my two cents and say that her primary role is to Fight Evil. Slaying, redeeming, sealing them under a spell in a dark dungeon that 'no one will find in a thousand years and ends up being cracked in twenty', that kind of thing. Their secondary role is Support Good. I will argue this is the importance of these two roles due to the focus of the class features and the order they come in. Smite evil first level, Lay on hands second.

Conversely, Clerics would be your defensive line. (In a perfectly balanced game, of course).

[Forrestfire]

So... Wait. What's the issue with an archetype shifting them out of a secondary role, then? Isn't that what archetypes are supposed to do? Fundamentally alter how a class functions?

[NineThePuma]

You have stated an "out of combat" role, which indicates that there is something they are doing for the party. The party has a role to fight evil, or not. The paladin's role within the party is not fight evil it's be tanky and peel for your mages so they can do their work or Dive straight for the biggest, baddest motherlover on the other side and murder their face off, as examples. So you saying that the paladin has a role of Fighting Evil and Supporting Good doesn't jive, to me, with your complaint that Lay On Hands and Spells were intrinsic to their role.

A Paladin can Fight Evil by smiting, slaying, sealing away, sure. But Supporting Good can be as simple as making sure the children have enough to eat and going without if they don't, helping a priestess retrieve sacred relics of her faith, being an inspiring beacon of community.

[Prime32]

This is pretty random, but is there any chance we could see support for the ripsaw glaive (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons/weapon-descriptions/glaive-ripsaw) in future? Either as a feat or a racial archetype? It's not that impressive in itself, but there's plenty of ways to slot in PoW stuff (e.g. use initiating modifier for bonus damage; refresh maneuvers when you wind the cord; wind/pull the cord faster and use it for Mithral Current).

[Ironsides]

This may be a bit late but I played in AGrinningCat’s playtest Saturday and it went better than last time (last time my vampire got dusted, may he rest in pieces). This time I rolled a Demon Hand Warlock Fiendbound Marauder and almost everything went ok until we met the bone priest. Who we chased THROUGH THE ENTIRE LEVEL setting off ALL the traps save 2. We spent 3 hours chasing this guy as he led us through every trap he could the Bennie Hill Theme was our theme song. Man did we grew to hate that bone priest…
I have come to the conclusion that if you wanted to tank with any initiating class you want Silver Crane because Enduring Crane Strike was used so, so many times.

The character had Powerful Build which helped with the dice of her Fiend’s Grip. You can find my build here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?404488-Making-a-Fiendbound-Marauder-for-a-Playtest) After this level our party will be level 3 which will turn this build on. I just want to compare DSP’s strength TWF with normal TWF. Lets assume you are focusing on either STR or DEX to the exclusion of the other and to have that stat give you a bonus to hit and to damage.

Pumping Dex (These feats are in no particular order).
1. Weapon Finesse
3. Two-Weapon Fighting
5. Deadly Agility

Pumping Strength
1. Prodigious Two Weapon Fighting (A feat that actually does nothing by itself until you take the TWF)
3. Two-Weapon Fighting

It takes you one less feat to be one stat dependent than with the usual TWF dex build. Just wanted to point that out.

[ghanjrho]

This may be a bit late but I played in AGrinningCat’s playtest Saturday and it went better than last time (last time my vampire got dusted, may he rest in pieces). This time I rolled a Demon Hand Warlock Fiendbound Marauder and almost everything went ok until we met the bone priest. Who we chased THROUGH THE ENTIRE LEVEL setting off ALL the traps save 2. We spent 3 hours chasing this guy as he led us through every trap he could the Bennie Hill Theme was our theme song. Man did we grew to hate that bone priest…
I have come to the conclusion that if you wanted to tank with any initiating class you want Silver Crane because Enduring Crane Strike was used so, so many times.

The character had Powerful Build which helped with the dice of her Fiend’s Grip. You can find my build here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?404488-Making-a-Fiendbound-Marauder-for-a-Playtest) After this level our party will be level 3 which will turn this build on. I just want to compare DSP’s strength TWF with normal TWF. Lets assume you are focusing on either STR or DEX to the exclusion of the other and to have that stat give you a bonus to hit and to damage.

Pumping Dex (These feats are in no particular order).
1. Weapon Finesse
3. Two-Weapon Fighting
5. Deadly Agility

Pumping Strength
1. Prodigious Two Weapon Fighting (A feat that actually does nothing by itself until you take the TWF)
3. Two-Weapon Fighting

It takes you one less feat to be one stat dependent than with the usual TWF dex build. Just wanted to point that out.

Except the STR TWF should properly be pTWF-TWF-Double Slice, to get full damage on the off hand, which Deadly Agility gives free.

[CashanDraven]

You have stated an "out of combat" role, which indicates that there is something they are doing for the party. The party has a role to fight evil, or not. The paladin's role within the party is not fight evil it's be tanky and peel for your mages so they can do their work or Dive straight for the biggest, baddest motherlover on the other side and murder their face off, as examples. So you saying that the paladin has a role of Fighting Evil and Supporting Good doesn't jive, to me, with your complaint that Lay On Hands and Spells were intrinsic to their role.

A Paladin can Fight Evil by smiting, slaying, sealing away, sure. But Supporting Good can be as simple as making sure the children have enough to eat and going without if they don't, helping a priestess retrieve sacred relics of her faith, being an inspiring beacon of community.

Ok, being suicidal does not make a paladin a paladin. And any mage worth his salt is going to put himself in a position that he doesn't need someone to peel for him, in fact he can have summons do that.

Also, the paladin is literally meant to fight evil at all turns, from lvl 1. Detect Evil, Smite Evil, Lay on Hands that can cure afflictions. Mechanically, and just sheer flavor, a paladin has a duty to a higher cause long before he has a duty to his party. Now that's not saying he's just going to leave his buddy to die, but sending a demon back to hell would certainly be at the front of his mind before being a grunt for his wizard pal in the robes.

[AGrinningCat]

You have stated an "out of combat" role, which indicates that there is something they are doing for the party. The party has a role to fight evil, or not. The paladin's role within the party is not fight evil it's be tanky and peel for your mages so they can do their work or Dive straight for the biggest, baddest motherlover on the other side and murder their face off, as examples. So you saying that the paladin has a role of Fighting Evil and Supporting Good doesn't jive, to me, with your complaint that Lay On Hands and Spells were intrinsic to their role.

A Paladin can Fight Evil by smiting, slaying, sealing away, sure. But Supporting Good can be as simple as making sure the children have enough to eat and going without if they don't, helping a priestess retrieve sacred relics of her faith, being an inspiring beacon of community.

This is largely why I wanted to collect my argument before presenting it -- my gripe isn't it's non-combat role, but it's secondary. Now it looks like I'm moving goalposts.

Let's forget about Anti-paladins for a second, as they should really be considered their own class.

A paladin's role is to fight evil, and you've been given the tools to do so. Regardless of what your party does, this is what the class is geared towards A party could fight evil, but that varies from campaign to campaign, even if the composition of the party remains the same. Detect Evil, Smite Evil, Spells such as Challenge Evil, Protection from Evil, Weapon's against Evil, offensive use of Lay on hands, Divine Bond granting Holy, Channel Positive energy, etc etc. Their primary tools are used to find evil and put it six feet under. Permanently. You can even fall for not fulfilling this role, although I don't want this to be considered due the controversy behind it.

As for their secondary role, Supporting Good, their job is to, well, support good. Soaking hits, handing out buffs, healing people, curing ability damage/status effects -- All of her secondary role is tied up in her spells, her lay on hands, and her Auras. While she does gain from losing the former two, I don't believe that Crusader's shield is the equivalent of Lay on Hands. Really shifting Crusader's Shield into a Crusader's Training option or just allowing it to exist as another option along side Lay on Hands while still drawing from the same pool would fix about 90% of my problem with the Archetype*, as True-Mercies and the Ability to Heal and Cure outside of combat would go a long way to keeping his support role hammer down, especially along side his maneuvers. Here would be the part where I argue the benefits, drawbacks, states of combat, and math of Crusader's Shield vs Lay on Hands, but I'm underprepared for this argument.

As for your last paragraph -- A paladin's tool set doesn't explicitly support that. A Wizard could do all that you listed -- As could a rogue, a druid, or even a Necromancer. That's purely role play, and unless the Paladin has something that explicitly supports that (More than just say, Create water or a high Charisma score), it shouldn't really be taken into account.

*The other 10% is how you lose Divine Bond which is super stylin' in both forms and I'm sad that I'll never get to have my own celestial mount for Piercing Thunder outside half a dozen feats.


So... Wait. What's the issue with an archetype shifting them out of a secondary role, then? Isn't that what archetypes are supposed to do? Fundamentally alter how a class functions?

My issue is that I don't believe that Paladin base and Knight Disciple are equal in terms of power. A Warder and a Zweihander Sentinel share the same roles, even if power is shifted around. A Paladin and Knight Disciple should be the same power, but I believe that the Paladin gives up too much for Knight disciple.

[Ironsides]

Except the STR TWF should properly be pTWF-TWF-Double Slice, to get full damage on the off hand, which Deadly Agility gives free.

(Spends a minute looking up Double Slice.) (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/double-slice-combat---final)

WHY????!!!! I didn't realize that TWF doesn't give you STR bonus on off-hand light weapons. Why is this rule even a thing! It just cracks me up how much Paizo HATES martial characters. Its this kind of stupid stuff that makes people NOT want to play martial characters. *Runs foaming at the mouth into the wilderness to vent his frustrations.*

[CashanDraven]

My issue is that I don't believe that Paladin base and Knight Disciple are equal in terms of power. A Warder and a Zweihander Sentinel share the same roles, even if power is shifted around. A Paladin and Knight Disciple should be the same power, but I believe that the Paladin gives up too much for Knight disciple.

I completely agree with this, losing spells takes a huge chunk of power away, even if you can still use spell trigger items.

You also lose access to channeling feats, and Crusader's shield isn't as useful as Lay on Hands by a long shot. Temp HP is nice, but it's not something I can share with the whole party. I have to do this on person at a time, now if was an aura effect that granted DR or fast healing, that would be a solid trade imo.

[NineThePuma]

This is largely why I wanted to collect my argument before presenting it -- my gripe isn't it's non-combat role, but it's secondary. Now it looks like I'm moving goalposts.

Let's forget about Anti-paladins for a second, as they should really be considered their own class.

A paladin's role is to fight evil, and you've been given the tools to do so. Regardless of what your party does, this is what the class is geared towards A party could fight evil, but that varies from campaign to campaign, even if the composition of the party remains the same. Detect Evil, Smite Evil, Spells such as Challenge Evil, Protection from Evil, Weapon's against Evil, offensive use of Lay on hands, Divine Bond granting Holy, Channel Positive energy, etc etc. Their primary tools are used to find evil and put it six feet under. Permanently. You can even fall for not fulfilling this role, although I don't want this to be considered due the controversy behind it.

As for their secondary role, Supporting Good, their job is to, well, support good. Soaking hits, handing out buffs, healing people, curing ability damage/status effects -- All of her secondary role is tied up in her spells, her lay on hands, and her Auras. While she does gain from losing the former two, I don't believe that Crusader's shield is the equivalent of Lay on Hands. Really shifting Crusader's Shield into a Crusader's Training option or just allowing it to exist as another option along side Lay on Hands while still drawing from the same pool would fix about 90% of my problem with the Archetype*, as True-Mercies and the Ability to Heal and Cure outside of combat would go a long way to keeping his support role hammer down, especially along side his maneuvers. Here would be the part where I argue the benefits, drawbacks, states of combat, and math of Crusader's Shield vs Lay on Hands, but I'm underprepared for this argument.

As for your last paragraph -- A paladin's tool set doesn't explicitly support that. A Wizard could do all that you listed -- As could a rogue, a druid, or even a Necromancer. That's purely role play, and unless the Paladin has something that explicitly supports that (More than just say, Create water or a high Charisma score), it shouldn't really be taken into account.

*The other 10% is how you lose Divine Bond which is super stylin' in both forms and I'm sad that I'll never get to have my own celestial mount for Piercing Thunder outside half a dozen feats.

Ah, so you view paladins as Bruiser/Supports, while I'm viewing them as Bruiser/Tanks. In that case, you are probably correct in that they are losing a great deal of power, but I feel that they're gaining a great deal, so it might just be a differing impression on where that power is?

[AGrinningCat]

Ah, so you view paladins as Bruiser/Supports, while I'm viewing them as Bruiser/Tanks. In that case, you are probably correct in that they are losing a great deal of power, but I feel that they're gaining a great deal, so it might just be a differing impression on where that power is?

How do you define a tank?
Edit: And a Bruiser and a Support for that matter.

[NineThePuma]

How do you define a tank?
Edit: And a Bruiser and a Support for that matter.

A tank is someone whose job is supposed to draw aggro and take the damages; D&D in general (and Pathfinder has this apply still) has poor "aggro tanking" in the sense of "you must kill me" or taunts and instead relies on having enough Crowd Control to be "to get to them you gotta go through me" and is typically defined as having abilities that mitigate damage in the D&D sense (for example, Temporary HP, DR, healing, etc.)

A "Bruiser" is something that I define as "nonsquishy melee dps" which is typically a damage oriented fighter in D&D. Someone who doesn't mind taking damage and dishing it out.

A "Support" is an "Enabler"; it's a role I define as being around enabling others to push to the best of their abilities, via buffs, healing, dispelling enemy debuffs, dispelling of enemy buffs, debuffing enemies, etc. For them, field effects and the status bar are more important than the HP bar, except in the situation of allies being hurt.

[MilleniaAntares]

Yeah, the text of the maneuver makes it pretty clear that you have to be holding a weapon in one hand (unless this is some shenanigans like if you're holding a weapon in two hands you're also holding it in one hand). It kind of sucks for me, as I would have loved for my Zweihander Sentinel to use Scarlet Throne, but he wields a greatsword and one of the best early stances is useless for him. The fluff for Scarlet Throne is awesome though, and I can understand why they'd have that restriction.
I think the general point is to have a stance that especially benefits a somewhat underpowered weapon style: a single light or one-handed weapon with a shield no bigger than a buckler.

As opposed to two-handed weapons, which are more or less great with damage output, or two-weapon fighting (in theory, at least). And one-handers with a decently sized shield for good defense.

Being two-handed weapon user, you'll have to either choose between offense (Stance of Aggression) or defense (Stance of the Defending Shell).

Beyond that, as a Zweihander Sentinel, you already get a defensive boost through your Zweihander Training.

[CashanDraven]

A tank is someone whose job is supposed to draw aggro and take the damages; D&D in general (and Pathfinder has this apply still) has poor "aggro tanking" in the sense of "you must kill me" or taunts and instead relies on having enough Crowd Control to be "to get to them you gotta go through me" and is typically defined as having abilities that mitigate damage in the D&D sense (for example, Temporary HP, DR, healing, etc.)

A "Bruiser" is something that I define as "nonsquishy melee dps" which is typically a damage oriented fighter in D&D. Someone who doesn't mind taking damage and dishing it out.

A "Support" is an "Enabler"; it's a role I define as being around enabling others to push to the best of their abilities, via buffs, healing, dispelling enemy debuffs, dispelling of enemy buffs, debuffing enemies, etc. For them, field effects and the status bar are more important than the HP bar, except in the situation of allies being hurt.


By your logic then a Barbarian is the best tank in the game.


Edit: Bloodrager fits all of these things you list, therefor Bloodrager > Paladin for tanking.

[Forrestfire]

Honestly, the best tank in the game is probably Cleric or Wizard. Lots of abilities that keep the enemy next to you, and also lots of abilities to keep them from hurting you.

Barbarian is a good enough bruiser-tank, though, yes.

[NineThePuma]

Barbarian is an excellent tanky bruiser, though mage tanks are best, as forrestfire said.

That said, Barbarians have tendency to be defined as Bruisers First, DPS second, or being DPS/Tanks. Which is about as illogical as it sounds. I blame Conan.

[Ilorin Lorati]

That comment really makes me want to try to make a Bloodrager tank.

[CyanEyed]

Barbarian is an excellent tanky bruiser, though mage tanks are best, as forrestfire said.

That said, Barbarians have tendency to be defined as Bruisers First, DPS second, or being DPS/Tanks. Which is about as illogical as it sounds. I blame Conan.

What is a bruiser if not a tank/dps? There's not a single thing illogical about that.

[CashanDraven]

Barbarian is an excellent tanky bruiser, though mage tanks are best, as forrestfire said.

That said, Barbarians have tendency to be defined as Bruisers First, DPS second, or being DPS/Tanks. Which is about as illogical as it sounds. I blame Conan.


You really can't see the forest for the trees here can you?

You keep calling classes these things when they are traditionally not these things. Paladin's have never really had tank potential in the mmo sense like you obviously have in mind.

Barbarians, even strictly core have more options for tanking than a paladin.

And of course mages are best, they are the best at EVERYTHING. They have a spell for every situation, at almost any time.

[NineThePuma]

What is a bruiser if not a tank/dps? There's not a single thing illogical about that.

I classify DPS in the traditional sense of "super squishy but TONS OF DAMAGE" which is most frequently in 3.5 shown via Leap Attack Shock Trooper for Barbs or Sneak Attack for Rogues. I mean, being the most high damage thing in the room is a great way to draw aggro, but it's not /typically/ what you expect.

[AGrinningCat]

A tank is someone whose job is supposed to draw aggro and take the damages; D&D in general (and Pathfinder has this apply still) has poor "aggro tanking" in the sense of "you must kill me" or taunts and instead relies on having enough Crowd Control to be "to get to them you gotta go through me" and is typically defined as having abilities that mitigate damage in the D&D sense (for example, Temporary HP, DR, healing, etc.)

A "Bruiser" is something that I define as "nonsquishy melee dps" which is typically a damage oriented fighter in D&D. Someone who doesn't mind taking damage and dishing it out.

A "Support" is an "Enabler"; it's a role I define as being around enabling others to push to the best of their abilities, via buffs, healing, dispelling enemy debuffs, dispelling of enemy buffs, debuffing enemies, etc. For them, field effects and the status bar are more important than the HP bar, except in the situation of allies being hurt.

http://i.imgur.com/rWQn0dk.png
This isn't perfect, but it's something to help get my point across.
Defining classes on my end.
Defense (Primary job is to Funnel damage and effects into herself and Reduces damage or other effects to a manageable amount)
Offense (Primary job is to deal damage, make sure enemies die before the tank or support is overwhelmed.)
Support (Primary job is to keep party doing their jobs, and making them do it better.)

Paladin's don't make good tanks because they're unappealing targets. Shields, heavy armor, high hit dice, high saves, etc etc -- Without a way to force people to attack you, I cannot concede to the idea that a Paladin could be a tank. While they do have access to spells (Knight's move, Challenge Evil, Compel Hostility), they are not as good as something else you could put in that slot. (Protection from Evil, Shield other, Holy Shield, Bless, Bless Weapon, Divine Favor..) Being on the front line dealing damage isn't a great way to pull threat -- If the Rogue is dealing as much damage, the rogue would be a lot easier to remove than trying to fight that paladin.

Paladins do make good Bruisers though -- Their high defense combined with the ability to dish out respectable damage means they can be on the front line and stay on the front line for a long while. They also have good self healing.

They also make good Defenders as well. Their high defense combined with their support abilities (Spells, Lay on Hands, Auras) means that they're good for frontline supports, or Defenders by another name.

[CyanEyed]

I classify DPS in the traditional sense of "super squishy but TONS OF DAMAGE" which is most frequently in 3.5 shown via Leap Attack Shock Trooper for Barbs or Sneak Attack for Rogues. I mean, being the most high damage thing in the room is a great way to draw aggro, but it's not /typically/ what you expect.

There's a word for that. Striker.

Bruiser indicates both a certain measure of DPS, and a certain measure of durability.
As not every character classification will be in a given party, A bruiser will very often fill both the role of dps and tank, especially at early levels.

[NineThePuma]

http://i.imgur.com/rWQn0dk.png
This isn't perfect, but it's something to help get my point across.
Defining classes on my end.
Defense (Primary job is to Funnel damage and effects into herself and Reduces damage or other effects to a manageable amount)
Offense (Primary job is to deal damage, make sure enemies die before the tank or support is overwhelmed.)
Support (Primary job is to keep party doing their jobs, and making them do it better.)

Paladin's don't make good tanks because they're unappealing targets. Shields, heavy armor, high hit dice, high saves, etc etc -- Without a way to force people to attack you, I cannot concede to the idea that a Paladin could be a tank. While they do have access to spells (Knight's move, Challenge Evil, Compel Hostility), they are not as good as something else you could put in that slot. (Protection from Evil, Shield other, Holy Shield, Bless, Bless Weapon, Divine Favor..) Being on the front line dealing damage isn't a great way to pull threat -- If the Rogue is dealing as much damage, the rogue would be a lot easier to remove than trying to fight that paladin.

Paladins do make good Bruisers though -- Their high defense combined with the ability to dish out respectable damage means they can be on the front line and stay on the front line for a long while. They also have good self healing.

They also make good Defenders as well. Their high defense combined with their support abilities (Spells, Lay on Hands, Auras) means that they're good for frontline supports, or Defenders by another name.

I disagree with your assessment of Paladins As Tanks (I'd say all those things that are there that you call "properties that make unappealing targets" I call "good features for someone who is secondarily a tank") and looking at your definition, I firmly place Paladins as Scrappers. Their support abilities are at best tertiary to their role in the party, imo. You're free to believe differently, but I find that Knight Protector is sacrificing something that they don't need for their role (support abilities) to better focus on their role.


There's a word for that. Striker.

Bruiser indicates both a certain measure of DPS, and a certain measure of durability.
As not every character classification will be in a given party, A bruiser will very often fill both the role of dps and tank, especially at early levels.

I actually use Striker as my go to word for DPS. I have a quintfecta of Striker/Tank/Support/Mage/Bruiser as roles.

[CyanEyed]

I actually use Striker as my go to word for DPS. I have a quintfecta of Striker/Tank/Support/Mage/Bruiser as roles.

First and foremost, you should feel bad for using the psuedo-word 'quintfecta'.

Secondly, the use of that word indicates that you believe that all those roles are separate and distinct. As previously noted, a bruiser is a hybrid between tank and DPS. Additionally, a 'mage' can fill any or all of the other roles depending on what spells he has access to. You need to revise your definition of party roles to effectively participate in this conversation.

[NineThePuma]

First and foremost, you should feel bad for using the psuedo-word 'quintfecta'.

Secondly, the use of that word indicates that you believe that all those roles are separate and distinct. As previously noted, a bruiser is a hybrid between tank and DPS. Additionally, a 'mage' can fill any or all of the other roles depending on what spells he has access to. You need to revise your definition of party roles to effectively participate in this conversation.

I refuse to feel bad because I like the word "quintfecta" and it reminds me of pinatas. Perhaps you should feel bad that your recourse to "the paladin sacrificing utility for more offense/defense is a perfectly valid decision" is personal attacks and implications of stupidity?

To me, the paladin's utility is tertiary at best, and I would rather ditch it for more power than have it sit uselessly. If we are considering Paladins in the broader 3.P I would find it a bigger sacrifice, but in the PoW+Core environment I probably wouldn't bother with Paladin without the archetype.

[Lady Serpentine]

First and foremost, you should feel bad for using the psuedo-word 'quintfecta'.

Secondly, the use of that word indicates that you believe that all those roles are separate and distinct. As previously noted, a bruiser is a hybrid between tank and DPS. Additionally, a 'mage' can fill any or all of the other roles depending on what spells he has access to. You need to revise your definition of party roles to effectively participate in this conversation.

First and foremost, you should feel bad for being needlessly pedantic when it is clear what the word means.

Secondly, if you have a problem with something, try actually explaining where you think people are wrong rather than blindly repeating your already iterated points and resorting to personal attacks. Maybe people will actually be able to hold a discussion with you then.

[squiggit]

I've never heard scrapper use. I'd probably call a tank who can hit hard or a striker who can take a punch both bruisers. Though if I had to pick one the latter is the one I've heard bruiser used for more often.

[CyanEyed]

I refuse to feel bad because I like the word "quintfecta" and it reminds me of pinatas. Perhaps you should feel bad that your recourse to "the paladin sacrificing utility for more offense/defense is a perfectly valid decision" is personal attacks and implications of stupidity?

To me, the paladin's utility is tertiary at best, and I would rather ditch it for more power than have it sit uselessly. If we are considering Paladins in the broader 3.P I would find it a bigger sacrifice, but in the PoW+Core environment I probably wouldn't bother with Paladin without the archetype.

Pinatas are pretty cool, I guess you've got me there.

I apologize If it seems like I was taking issue with you personally, allow me to explain my understanding of class roles with an annoyingly long reply.

A character does things within 3 broad categories:

1. Damage
2. Durability
3. Utility

A regular paladin is sitting at about a 3 of 5 in each category. [citation needed] While this doesn't make them the best at everything, it does allow them to perform a very broad range of roles within a given party.
The Knight Disciple bumps damage and durability up to a 4 of 5 through the use of maneuvers and counters, while reducing utility to a 1 or 2 by removing the ability to actually cure damage and status effects after combat.
While this likely seems like a fair trade, it prevents the paladin from filling a roll in a party that it was otherwise able to fill, while still not being the best option for the other 2 it gained in.

TL;DR: You could trait silver crane onto a Warder and it would do the knight disciple's job better.

[ErrantX]

I think the general point is to have a stance that especially benefits a somewhat underpowered weapon style: a single light or one-handed weapon with a shield no bigger than a buckler.

As opposed to two-handed weapons, which are more or less great with damage output, or two-weapon fighting (in theory, at least). And one-handers with a decently sized shield for good defense.

Being two-handed weapon user, you'll have to either choose between offense (Stance of Aggression) or defense (Stance of the Defending Shell).

Beyond that, as a Zweihander Sentinel, you already get a defensive boost through your Zweihander Training.

This is basically the whole thing right here.


http://i.imgur.com/rWQn0dk.png
This isn't perfect, but it's something to help get my point across.


I don't really have anything to add beyond that I really like this graphic and I'm totally stealing it.

-X

[Tempestfury]

I don't really have anything to add beyond that I really like this graphic and I'm totally stealing it.

It is rather neat I'll admit.

[Jacob.Tyr]

This thread is huge, so I apologize if this has been clarified and I just couldn't find it. For Archetypes, a "max level" for maneuvers is given. How does this interact with multiclassing? Would, say, a Paladin with Knight Disciple who takes a few levels in Battle Templar not improve their highest level known for the levels in Battle Templar? Would a non-initiator dip increase this by half?

Going to try and test out Knight Disciple on an Oradin build, and just wanted clarification for when I bring it up to my DM.

[Elricaltovilla]

Since you guys decided to have this argument without me (I was asleep), I guess I'm a little late to the party here. I won't argue terminology, as that doesn't actually help anything, but I will define the following terms in order to explain the thought process behind the Knight Disciple:

Tank: A character capable of preventing damage from being applied to his allies, either through damage redirection, mitigation or penalizing attack rolls of enemies.
Healer: A character capable of restoring lost hit points to allies and removing or preventing status effects.
DPR: A character capable of doing lots of damage in a round. Alternatively, how much damage per round a character can deal.
Controller: A character capable of either buffing allies, or debuffing enemies.

Based on those terms, the Paladin is mechanically capable of two things, DPR and Healing, with perhaps a smidgen of Controller from some off chance spells. But the Paladin fluff presents itself as being capable of Tanking, Healing and DPR in equal measure. How many threads have we all seen with a title like "Help me build a Tank! [PF]" and the first thing the OP says is "I was thinking either Fighter or Paladin," and we have to sadly explain to the prospective player that no, fighters and paladins don't make good tanks because they can't mitigate damage or direct attacks away from allies.

The Knight Disciple aims to solve that issue, by trading out of combat healing for improved in combat healing and damage mitigation based tanking. The reason for this is because of the Warder. The Warder is the gold standard of tanking in Pathfinder and it particularly excels in zone control, punishing enemies within a large area and locking them down. If I were to make the Paladin into a tank like the warder though, it would never be able to compete. Instead, we went with an alternative tanking style.

By focusing on in combat healing and a sort of shield other effect, the Knight Disciple gets to tank, but also manages to do it differently than the Warder. The Knight Disciple has the best healing strikes in the game, allowing him to mitigate damage taken easier than anyone else and has the ability to prevent status effects and damage from landing in the first place. In fact, if you look at the wording of the Knight Disciple's Merciful Shield only burns one round of use whenever it prevents a status effect. That makes it decidedly better than Lay on Hands for healing conditions, even if Temporary HP is worse than actual healing.

The last thing we tried to do was keep as much of the Paladins out of combat utility as possible. Spell completion items and wands were there because cure light wounds healing is best healing, and the Crusader's Training abilities cover most of the other effects that a paladin would want from his spells. In some cases, Crusader's Training is better than a regular paladin (detect all alignments and undead at once, free ghost touch, off turn movement, scaling disruptive, earlier access to banishment, the list goes on.)

The Knight Disciple plays differently than a regular paladin, and it doesn't tank like the Warder. It's its own thing, and requires a different way of thinking in order to run properly. You need to be aware of how your allies are doing so that you know when to apply your damage mitigation effects, and you need to stay aggressive in order to capitalize on your healing ability.

[AGrinningCat]

I've never heard scrapper use. I'd probably call a tank who can hit hard or a striker who can take a punch both bruisers. Though if I had to pick one the latter is the one I've heard bruiser used for more often.

Back in like, 2000? 2002? There was a game that started up called City of Heroes which split up the roles much how I wrote them out in the graphic. Classes had access to two power sets (For example, Brutes had access to Offensive and Defensive power sets as their Primary/Secondary respectively), and their Power sets were shared between classes -- A Defender's Secondary (Blasting, AKA ranged damage) was shared nearly power for power by a Blaster's Primary; the key difference was the the Blaster got hers earlier and was more effective with it.
The original 5 classes were Defender, Tank, Scrapper, Blaster and Controller. Tanks and Scrappers were the only true melee, and Tanks being Defense/Offense with their power sets, and Scrappers being Offense/Defense in their power set. When City of Villains released, two more melee classes were added -- The Brute and the Stalker. The Stalker was a rogue analog(Still Offense/Defense), and the Brute was a more tanky version of the Scrapper(But also Offense/Defense). On a sliding scale of power:

Defense -------- Offense
Tank --- Brute --- Scrapper --- Stalker.

Brute's used Tank secondary sets as their primary, while Scrappers shared sets with the Stalker. For example, Martial arts wasn't available to Brutes, while Super Strength wasn't available to Scrappers. Generally you can think of a Brute as Colossus and a Scrapper as Wolverine.

On the ranged side of things
Defense -------- Offense
Controller --- Defender --- Dominator --- Corruptor --- Blaster.

There was also the Mastermind class, a true pet class that allowed you to have up to 7 permanent pets to do your bidding, and did a bit of everything without being a master of it. Most of them were a DPS, where I'd place on between the Dominator and the Corruptor, but they also could use minions as fodder to 'Tank'. Their secondary was support oriented.

All in all the game helped shape my views on class structure, gameplay, and other mechanics, and I'd gladly talk in length about it, but this isn't the place for it -- Simply know that Scrapper is Offense/Defense, primarily melee, was often referred to as the 'Living Blender' class, and could fill the role of a Tank in a pinch. The Brute(Bruiser on the chart) filled the Tank role better, but could still dish out a respectable amount of damage through it's Fury mechanic. Of course, the Tank made the best tank, but it could also still slap people around and still be effective at it.

[Elricaltovilla]

This thread is huge, so I apologize if this has been clarified and I just couldn't find it. For Archetypes, a "max level" for maneuvers is given. How does this interact with multiclassing? Would, say, a Paladin with Knight Disciple who takes a few levels in Battle Templar not improve their highest level known for the levels in Battle Templar? Would a non-initiator dip increase this by half?

Going to try and test out Knight Disciple on an Oradin build, and just wanted clarification for when I bring it up to my DM.

I'll try to answer as much of this as I can, and I'll come back to you with the rest. A Knight Disciple can only learn up to 6th level maneuvers through class features, however he still has a full Initiator Level, and so he can learn higher level maneuvers through feats (Advanced Study). Multiclassing shouldn't change this (I will double check on the Prestige Classes though). The non-initiator dip would provide 1/2 IL per level, so a Knight Disciple 3/Oracle 2 would have an IL of 4, whereas a straight Knight Disciple would have an IL of 5 (and could learn higher level maneuvers).

Does that clarify things?

[ErrantX]

This thread is huge, so I apologize if this has been clarified and I just couldn't find it. For Archetypes, a "max level" for maneuvers is given. How does this interact with multiclassing? Would, say, a Paladin with Knight Disciple who takes a few levels in Battle Templar not improve their highest level known for the levels in Battle Templar? Would a non-initiator dip increase this by half?

Going to try and test out Knight Disciple on an Oradin build, and just wanted clarification for when I bring it up to my DM.

Multiclass characters can get around that restriction this way, largely because it doesn't reward you like it used to in 3.5 to do so. You generally lose too much so its accepted and intended. So non IL classes count for half and that paladin and prc would count full and battle templar giving you moves circumvents the max level cap.

-X

[Jacob.Tyr]

I didn't realize there was a big discussion going on about knight disciple on the last few pages, weird.

Thanks for the clarification, so the limit is a hard limit for maneuvers gained via the class features. That makes sense, so a KD hitting level 7 can only learn a 3rd level maneuver from his class features increasing his known maneuvers, but if he takes advanced study at level 7 he could learn another 2 level 4 maneuvers as the feat acts on total initiator level and isn't limited the same way as his class features.

Thanks! That makes things seem much more viable.

[Elricaltovilla]

And, according to ErrantX, you can go into Battle Templar in order to learn higher level maneuvers as well.

[Ilorin Lorati]

That's another one of the things that could probably be cleared up in wording. Discussions with people off the site have led me to believe that the average person won't realize that's the case, so the maximum level rules for the partial archetypes could probablybe reworded.

[Elricaltovilla]

That's another one of the things that could probably be cleared up in wording. Discussions with people off the site have led me to believe that the average person won't realize that's the case, so the maximum level rules for the partial archetypes could probablybe reworded.

Good point. I'll do that sometime today, although if you have any suggestions for specific wording, it'd make my life easier.

[ErrantX]

I didn't realize there was a big discussion going on about knight disciple on the last few pages, weird.

Thanks for the clarification, so the limit is a hard limit for maneuvers gained via the class features. That makes sense, so a KD hitting level 7 can only learn a 3rd level maneuver from his class features increasing his known maneuvers, but if he takes advanced study at level 7 he could learn another 2 level 4 maneuvers as the feat acts on total initiator level and isn't limited the same way as his class features.

Thanks! That makes things seem much more viable.

Yup. The idea is that the limitation reflects a split focus - you're still doing your paladin-ing (in the above example) as your primary thing, and initiating is importing, but its secondary. By spending feats or multiclassing into an initiator prestige class, you're sharpening your focus at the cost of paladin-ing stuff or other pursuits, thus, you can overcome that restriction

-X

[Ilorin Lorati]

The easiest way by far would be to explicitly call out the ability. Since there's no actual text for the level limitation, I would go with something like this in the first Maneuvers Known paragraph (I'm using Primal Disciple, since it was the first one in the doc):


She learns additional maneuvers at higher levels, as shown in Table: Primal Disciple Maneuvers. The maximum level of maneuvers gained through Primal Disciple levels is limited by the those listed in the table; this restriction does not apply to maneuvers gained through other methods, such as through other classes or the Advanced Study feat.

[Nyaa]

I don't really have anything to add beyond that I really like this graphic and I'm totally stealing it.
This (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i5hWkHXHOetRlpLOmxbpoEWod77psN0JcwFvxClNrGc/edit?pli=1) classification is written specifically for Pathfinder.

[ErrantX]

The easiest way by far would be to explicitly call out the ability. Since there's no actual text for the level limitation, I would go with something like this in the first Maneuvers Known paragraph (I'm using Primal Disciple, since it was the first one in the doc):

I'm gonna steal this wording for the errata to clarify it. Thanks Ilorin!

-X

[Ilorin Lorati]

Happy to help. IRL I'm a programmer and a technical writer; clarity is literally my job. Despite my tendency to typo and overuse commas. That's what proofing is for!

[Tempestfury]

I like it, definitely staring it for future reference.

[AGrinningCat]

I don't really have anything to add beyond that I really like this graphic and I'm totally stealing it.

-X
I'm glad Y'all liked it, although I think it could have been done better.

words
I want to get back to this but I'm afraid I can't get to this since I'm phone posting and have my final in 45 minutes (wish me luck!)

That being said I'm out of college for all next week if Y'all need someone to run a campaign so Y'all can test out these classes.

[Elricaltovilla]

I'm glad Y'all liked it, although I think it could have been done better.

I want to get back to this but I'm afraid I can't get to this since I'm phone posting and have my final in 45 minutes (wish me luck!)

That being said I'm out of college for all next week if Y'all need someone to run a campaign so Y'all can test out these classes.

Good luck on your final. If you do end up running something let me know, and I'll roll up a knight disciple to show you what I mean (or be proven horribly wrong:smalltongue:)

[Vhaidara]

Depending on when things get run, I might want to try out the new ranger.

Whatever the case: Anyone who ends up in that game, remember, level 1 potions (Infernal Healing and CLW) are only 25gp)

[Taveena]

With regards to Tempest Gale Style - "Performing a combat maneuver this way is a standard action that provokes an attack of opportunity (unless you have the appropriate improved combat maneuver feat) and uses your Dexterity modifier in place of your Strength modifier on the CMB roll."

Does this mean you cannot make a ranged combat maneuver with a ranged AoO?

[Elricaltovilla]

With regards to Tempest Gale Style - "Performing a combat maneuver this way is a standard action that provokes an attack of opportunity (unless you have the appropriate improved combat maneuver feat) and uses your Dexterity modifier in place of your Strength modifier on the CMB roll."

Does this mean you cannot make a ranged combat maneuver with a ranged AoO?

By RAW, that is correct. Fortunately, there's a feat for that: Seize the Opportunity. :smallwink:

[AGrinningCat]

Good luck on your final. If you do end up running something let me know, and I'll roll up a knight disciple to show you what I mean (or be proven horribly wrong:smalltongue:)

Set a time and gather players and I'll run it All next week, minus Friday evening through Sunday since I have previous games I'm running.

I'm here in seattle, but I'm flexible with my schedule.

Test is starting, see yall in an hour or so!

[squiggit]

I'd be down for trying something out somewhere.

[Taveena]

Seize the Opportunity doesn't seem to work with the special ranged combat maneuver granted by Tempest Gale Style, due to it still being a standard action.

[Ilorin Lorati]

I really want to try out a whip-using Vigilante, personally. Keledrath's Mummy's Mask game doesn't seem to be going anywhere. :smallfrown:

[Elricaltovilla]

Seize the Opportunity doesn't seem to work with the special ranged combat maneuver granted by Tempest Gale Style, due to it still being a standard action.

It does, as they're still making combat maneuvers. I'll see about fixing the wording, but you can consider that an official ruling for now.

[RedOndjage]

In response to what Eric said about Knight Disciples: My fiancee is playing one in our weekly pathfinder game and it's working exactly like he said it would. Between her shield ability, the protection from evil ability it can be augmented with, and her powerful healing strikes, the archetype presents a great alternative tanking set up compared to the Warder. It even doubles as a DPR focused class vs. things that are vulnerable to sacred damage. It just needs the capstone revised.

It pairs very well with my hawk guard, hussar warder. Disabling combat maneuvers via Tempest Gale can allow the pair to take on pretty high numbers of enemies. We held off 8 cr-2 enemies by ourselves last game.

[AGrinningCat]

Oh man, that hour was a bit of an understatement.

Anyways, if you have something specific in mind your want ran, lemme know ahead of time so I can set up everything on my end. If you don't want a pazio module ran, I'll start getting a campaign together. What times are you free for?

[Elricaltovilla]

Oh man, that hour was a bit of an understatement.

Anyways, if you have something specific in mind your want ran, lemme know ahead of time so I can set up everything on my end. If you don't want a pazio module ran, I'll start getting a campaign together. What times are you free for?

Well, that's a bit tricky, because I'm off work the days you're unavailable. I'm also on the other side of the country from you, but I'd say I'm available after 6:30 PM EST (3:30 PST?) Sunday through Wednesday.

I'm not terribly picky about what's run, I'd like to request 4th level or higher as that's when the Knight Disciple really starts to kick into gear.

[Snowbluff]

Wait, someone's running a game?! Where? :smalltongue:

[Tempestfury]

Is the Soul-Knife going to be the only psionic class to get a Path of War archetype?

[Ilorin Lorati]

Psychic Warrior already has one, too. Zealot also has a few. :smalltongue:

[Elricaltovilla]

Psychic Warrior has an archetype in PoW as well. We're looking at adding archetypes for Aegis, Dread and Cryptic as well. As long as it doesn't have 9th level casting/manifesting its a possibility for a future archetype.

[Ilorin Lorati]

Out of curiosity, have you all ever discussed the possibility of reducing the casting of a class in terms of entire levels in exchange for it? Tactician could definitely get away with having 6th-level manifesting and a bunch of other concessions for Initiating.

[Elricaltovilla]

Out of curiosity, have you all ever discussed the possibility of reducing the casting of a class in terms of entire levels in exchange for it? Tactician could definitely get away with having 6th-level manifesting and a bunch of other concessions for Initiating.

Too big of a change for an archetype. Probably too big even for a Class Template.

[Ilorin Lorati]

I guess. Seems like it'd be something interesting to play with considering the other options that have been tested to replace or remove casting, but if it'd be too much to implement... :shrug:

[ErrantX]

I've been mulling over new paths for the Pathwalker for other disciplines as well, but that's the only other thing to mention beyond what Elric's said.

-X

[AGrinningCat]

Wait, someone's running a game?! Where? :smalltongue:


Well, that's a bit tricky, because I'm off work the days you're unavailable. I'm also on the other side of the country from you, but I'd say I'm available after 6:30 PM EST (3:30 PST?) Sunday through Wednesday.

I'm not terribly picky about what's run, I'd like to request 4th level or higher as that's when the Knight Disciple really starts to kick into gear.

I'm fine with those times -- Sunday I have game (As a player, even!), but all of those other days I'll be fine. If the other play test group finishes early Saturday, we might be able to get something there too. Don't count on it.

I'm putting it on you to grab players though! We'll see what everyone wants, otherwise I can dig up a module or a homebrew to play through.

[Tempestfury]

Psychic Warrior has an archetype in PoW as well. We're looking at adding archetypes for Aegis, Dread and Cryptic as well. As long as it doesn't have 9th level casting/manifesting its a possibility for a future archetype.

Oh, right missed that one... which might be because I can't actually find it, nor the Soul-Knife Archetype (War Soul?) actually. They aren't in the archetype document... am I missing something?

Still, I'm very curious to see what you have planned for the Aegis however... through that isn't planned any time soon, is it? Currently focused on Tempest Gale and a bit of the Mystic.


I'm fine with those times -- Sunday I have game (As a player, even!), but all of those other days I'll be fine. If the other play test group finishes early Saturday, we might be able to get something there too. Don't count on it.

I'm putting it on you to grab players though! We'll see what everyone wants, otherwise I can dig up a module or a homebrew to play through.

... What time is it GMT?

[Ilorin Lorati]

They were released in the original book, they won't be in PoW:E.

[Tempestfury]

They were released in the original book, they won't be in PoW:E.

Oooooooh...

Well, they need to update the Soulknife SRD page at least, its not listed at the bottom of the page.

[Ilorin Lorati]

There's a lot of stuff missing from the Psionics pages, the least of which being the two PoW archetypes. If you go to the actual archetypes sub-page though, they're listed.

[Tempestfury]

Yeah I know, I managed to find it.