[Ascension Games] Path of Iron Playtest - Discussion Thread

[Seginus]

The Path of Iron playtest is now live!

For those that aren't already familiar with it, Path of Iron is a continuation of the "Path" series by Ascension Games, each one focusing on a theme of magic. This book's theme is "Iron", or more specifically, metal, constructs, traps, or object- and material-based magic.

The document includes the following:

The archivist, a scholarly mage that uses the new runic magic system.
The saboteur, a sneaky infiltrator that is a master of traps and tricks.
The vanguard, a support-oriented caster that teams up with a construct.
The rune magic system, along with 120 "scripts", feats, and magic items.
You can download it from DriveThruRPG (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/154253/Path-of-Iron--Playtest), the Paizo store (http://paizo.com/products/btpy9frm/discuss?Path-of-Iron-Playtest) or directly from the Ascension Games website (http://www.ascension-games.com/s/Path-of-Iron-Playtest.pdf).

This thread is for feedback and discussion on the material presented in the playtest document, as well as to give suggestions on how to expand upon the classes for the final release. Any feedback is welcome, but as always actual experience playing and using the material is the most valuable. The download will be updated periodically to reflect feedback and fixes within the document.

If you find the material interesting, consider checking out the Path of Iron Kickstarter (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2087616726/path-of-iron-pathfinder-roleplaying-game), which will be closing on August 9, 2015. I hope you like what's in store for Path of Iron!

Christopher Moore,
Ascension Games, LLC

[Vhaidara]

Looking good. I'll get the files downloaded tomorrow and look it over

[hiryuu]

Oh, my gosh!

Thank you for including the entirety of the subsystems in the playtest. You guys and Dreamscarred are the only ones that do this, Paizo keeps showing off "half finished" stuff for "playtest" and doesn't even show the two-thirds of the book that's supposed to be the parts we're always "missing." Can't playtest material if you don't have the material, you know?

Why do all the awesome kickstarters happen in the summer when I do not have money T_T

Will read over it as soon as I have time. Path of Shadows was awesome, hoping this will be just as good.

[Seginus]

Oh, my gosh!

Thank you for including the entirety of the subsystems in the playtest.

Well, it would be pretty hard to play the archivist without rune magic, right? :smalltongue:

Even then, there's still more to add to finish the system, mainly magic items and feats. I'll probably add more scripts as well by release time, but if I'm not able to I think the 120 in there are certainly sufficient as-is.

[Extra Anchovies]

http://i.imgur.com/7drHiqr.gif

I'll be giving the Vanguard a look as soon as I find the time, because I want to make sure I can build Gaige (http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121030201249/borderlands/images/b/b0/Gaige_info.jpg).

[khadgar567]

can vanguard can get wings augment for companion so we can use him as aerial scout

[Nyaa]

PDF could use bookmarks.

Fluff: verbal components and no somatic components sounds counterintuitive to me. When I hear "rune magic" I expect the mage to draw said runes on something or trace them in air, not speak words.

Engraving looks highly abusable. I expected it to let the script function as normal and not consume any charges.

Random scripts feedback:
Aegis: inertial armor (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/psionic-powers/i/inertial-armor) exists since 3.5 and I haven't seen it called overpowered even once.
Alter Form: 8th level version might as well have 10min/level duration, in line with shapechange and true metamorphosis.
Chain Blast looks weak. It does same damage as fireball, or empowered fireball when overloaded, but is three levels higher.
Enhance Physique: ... why take random wiz/sorc spells, rename then and bump them a level? Or not even bump in case of Jaunt? Won't it be better to print only new spells scripts and overload effects for existing ones?

I see other classes have no issues using spell lists. Though I'm not really sure why these three classes are in the same book, with slightly modified spell list taking up half the PDF while having nothing to do with two classes. I feel like 1/2 BAB class in the book named "Path of Iron" should be something akin to Artificer.

[Seginus]

Fluff: verbal components and no somatic components sounds counterintuitive to me. When I hear "rune magic" I expect the mage to draw said runes on something or trace them in air, not speak words.

The fluff used is that you are speaking words of magic power that form into runic symbols (which represent the words you speak). It could really go either way, but I wanted to try verbal-only casting.


Engraving looks highly abusable. I expected it to let the script function as normal and not consume any charges.
Can you explain why? It still takes a daily casting of the script.


Random scripts feedback:
Aegis: inertial armor (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/psionic-powers/i/inertial-armor) exists since 3.5 and I haven't seen it called overpowered even once.
Alter Form: 8th level version might as well have 10min/level duration, in line with shapechange and true metamorphosis.
Chain Blast looks weak. It does same damage as fireball, or empowered fireball when overloaded, but is three levels higher.
Enhance Physique: ... why take random wiz/sorc spells, rename then and bump them a level? Or not even bump in case of Jaunt? Won't it be better to print only new spells scripts and overload effects for existing ones?

Aegis blocks magic missiles and taps out at +6 armor while still being only a 1st level script (and can be cast on others, no less), whereas the psionic version is personal-only and takes up more power points to essentially raise its level. And since it's duration is hours/level, you can use engraving to get the most out of it way before the fight starts.

Alter form is 8th level, not 9th. Both shapechange and metamorphosis are 9th level and allow you to change form repeatedly for the duration; this is more in line with other 8th-level spells like giant form II and undead anatomy IV.

Chain blast I am looking at the damage for, but I'd like to see how it plays out more. Unlike fireball it can't miss, has no saving throw, does force damage, and ignores anything less than total cover or concealment, and since it hits specific targets you can fire it into melee range without hurting allies. Is it worth a 6th level? Maybe not. But it's definitely not on the same power level as a fireball.

Enhance physique is bumped a level because it's three effects in one (bull's strength, bear's endurance, and cat's grace). Having enhance physique at the same level as those other three isn't sensible since it'd be a straight upgrade due to its versatility. The same goes for enhance mind. This holds true for many of the scripts; they are bumped a level since it usually has either more versatile applications or the overload effect makes it stronger than the base effect.

As for your last point, that's not a bad idea idea. It would certainly save space. Rune magic wasn't intended to be a grand, sweeping overhaul like psionics or Spheres of Power, it was meant to be a one-off system for one or a few classes. It's inspired by the Shadowcaster from Tome of Magic, which if you've read that the majority of its mysteries were slight alterations on existing spells, rather than a complete recreation of every effect. I fully wrote out each one in the playtest so as to prevent the need to look up effects from other sources while doing the playtest; if enough people show interest a more condensed format, then I'll do so.


I see other classes have no issues using spell lists. Though I'm not really sure why these three classes are in the same book, with slightly modified spell list taking up half the PDF while having nothing to do with two classes. I feel like 1/2 BAB class in the book named "Path of Iron" should be something akin to Artificer.
Well, nothing says only the archivist will have access to rune magic; archetypes are a thing, after all, but it's going to be the only base class that is built around it unless the stretch goal for the Warden is reached. And it takes up half the PDF of the playtest because it only includes the three classes and rune magic; in the final book, it will be a much smaller percentage of the total product.

Artificers and classes like them have been done numerous times by both 3PP and homebrewers alike, so I didn't want to make yet another one.

[Geshar]

Hello! I'm a backer on the Kickstarter, and can't wait for the final product. However, I do have a couple of questions about the playtest document.

Archivist, Creation Study, Writ of Recovery states the following: For example, if you were 8th level and cast a recover script, it would heal 1d8+8 hit points instead of the normal 1d8+5 maximum.
However, the Recover script states it is 1d4 + 1 per level, plus 1d4 per charge. Which is correct? Personally I feel the 1d4 + (5) base is fairly weak, and in playtesting it was not worth using at low levels.

Vanguard, Vanguard Arcana states the following: The vanguard can select a single spell
from the sorcerer/wizard or vanguard spell list and add it to his list of spells known. This must be a spell that he is capable of casting.
What does that last sentence mean exactly? Can you give me an example of a spell they could not cast that would be a valid selection?
In addition, I'd like to see a few additional options for the companion itself, such as the ability to start as small size or grow to large size later, as well as multiple levels for effects such as Energy Discharge.

Thank you!

[Seginus]

Hello! I'm a backer on the Kickstarter, and can't wait for the final product. However, I do have a couple of questions about the playtest document.

Archivist, Creation Study, Writ of Recovery states the following: For example, if you were 8th level and cast a recover script, it would heal 1d8+8 hit points instead of the normal 1d8+5 maximum.
However, the Recover script states it is 1d4 + 1 per level, plus 1d4 per charge. Which is correct? Personally I feel the 1d4 + (5) base is fairly weak, and in playtesting it was not worth using at low levels.
It is supposed to be 1d4. The 1d4+1/level is a bit weak, yes, but it is ranged (unlike cure light wounds). There is also the ability to overload it for more healing, and if you are doing out-of-combat healing you can engrave the script to always get the boost of healing that overloading would provide.


Vanguard, Vanguard Arcana states the following: The vanguard can select a single spell
from the sorcerer/wizard or vanguard spell list and add it to his list of spells known. This must be a spell that he is capable of casting.
What does that last sentence mean exactly? Can you give me an example of a spell they could not cast that would be a valid selection?
It's saying you can't choose a spell you aren't able to cast yet. For example, at 5th level you can cast only 0th, 1st, and 2nd level spells, so you can't go choosing cone of cold or hold monster and the like since you can't cast spells of that level yet.

In addition, I'd like to see a few additional options for the companion itself, such as the ability to start as small size or grow to large size later, as well as multiple levels for effects such as Energy Discharge.
I am debating including a manner in which you can change the construct's size, since it's one of the many reasons the summoner's eidolon gets out of hand (being that the vanguard's closest comparison is a summoner, I don't want to repeat the same mistakes and make an OP class). You can still change its size by using the Share Spells ability and casting enlarge person or reduce person on it.

As for your second remark, I'm not sure energy discharge needs another level. What do you think it would do, were it to be included?

[Geshar]

First, thank you for the clarification.

While I understand the goal of reducing the healing to a manageable point I was comparing it to Words of Power, which is 1d6 + level (up to 5) at close range, amplified to 1d8 (same level).

https://sites.google.com/site/pathfinderogc/magic/variant-magic-rules/words-of-power/effect-words/lesser-cure

In truth I've been comparing much of the rune system to the words of power system, because of some of the similarities.

And I do agree with you about the sizing issue being one of the major eidolon problems (that and pounce), but I'm also a strong believer in reasonable levels of player choice, and the first thing I immediately thought to do with this class was to use the aoe ammo refill and some of the spells and make a "team mascot" type companion.

As for the last part, I'd like to see a second tier that adds an elemental effect to the blast. Fire beams have a chance to light targets on fire. Electric beams have an improved chance at damaging armored targets. Acid beams have a chance to sicken. Something that makes the original choice more than just "what immunity is easiest to bypass?".

[Seginus]

First, thank you for the clarification.

While I understand the goal of reducing the healing to a manageable point I was comparing it to Words of Power, which is 1d6 + level (up to 5) at close range, amplified to 1d8 (same level).

https://sites.google.com/site/pathfinderogc/magic/variant-magic-rules/words-of-power/effect-words/lesser-cure

In truth I've been comparing much of the rune system to the words of power system, because of some of the similarities.

And I do agree with you about the sizing issue being one of the major eidolon problems (that and pounce), but I'm also a strong believer in reasonable levels of player choice, and the first thing I immediately thought to do with this class was to use the aoe ammo refill and some of the spells and make a "team mascot" type companion.

As for the last part, I'd like to see a second tier that adds an elemental effect to the blast. Fire beams have a chance to light targets on fire. Electric beams have an improved chance at damaging armored targets. Acid beams have a chance to sicken. Something that makes the original choice more than just "what immunity is easiest to bypass?".

I can see your reasoning on it being comparable to the Words of Power ability, and I'll consider upping it to 1d6.

I may add an improvement to the energy discharge, but I'm not so sure. Since Energy Discharge can basically replace all of the companion's weapon attacks, having a chance on every attack to inflict sicken or light them on fire, or grant a flat bonus to rolls when targeting a metal creature is probably too much.

I am considering adding in a feat that allows energy damage dealt in a round to be totaled before applying it to energy resistance (essentially Clustered Shots for energy damage), but I think it'll cause some issues with many spells. If anything, I might make it a specific feat for construct companions that use Energy Discharge, or make sure to word it in a way to restrict it to weapons only.

[Fable]

Out of curiosity, why did you choose to make the Vanguard a charisma based caster rather then intelligence?

[Seginus]

Out of curiosity, why did you choose to make the Vanguard a charisma based caster rather then intelligence?

Balance reasons, along with flavor. On the balance side, the class can do a lot of things, and do them fairly well; purposefully making it a bid more MAD helps tone its strength down a bit.

Most construct-based classes have the theme of scientists, experimenters, and engineers, which are learned skills. I wanted to flavor it more as intuition and kinda inherent talent, since dividing your research and learning between magic, combat, and construct things struck me as odd. A Charisma-caster makes it easier to justify having a broader range of skills, since it's through intuition rather than practice.

[Fable]

That actually makes a lot of sense. I'm really excited for this class!

[Seginus]

It's been a while, hasn't it?

I've been hard at work on Path of Iron, and wanted to share some of the progress. I've finished writing all 100 spells to be found in Path of Iron (as promised in the first stretch goal).

You can read up on the spells here. (http://www.ascension-games.com/blog/2015/9/16/preview-abcs-of-magic-in-path-of-iron) More spells will be added in the coming days.

Of course, since the playtest is still going on, feel free to give feedback on the spells so they can be improved in the final product.

[Seginus]

The final preview of spells in Path of Iron is here! If you missed any of the earlier previews, you can find all of them on the Ascension Games blog. I hope you've enjoyed reading some of these new options and are excited for the final release of Path of Iron!

Here's links to all seven of the previews:
 Part 1 (Anchoring Chains, Bladed Ground, and Constructed Anatomy) (http://www.ascension-games.com/blog/2015/9/16/preview-abcs-of-magic-in-path-of-iron)
Part 2 (Divine Strike, Enable Function, and Full Salvo) (http://www.ascension-games.com/blog/2015/9/18/preview-abcs-of-magic-part-2)
Part 3 (Grasping Steel, Hail of Arrows, and Instant Barding) (http://www.ascension-games.com/blog/2015/9/20/preview-abcs-of-magic-part-3)
Part 4 (Lockdown, Mark of the Golem, and Needle Storm) (http://www.ascension-games.com/blog/2015/9/22/preview-abcs-of-magic-part-4)
Part 5 (Observation Trap Extension, Protective Discharge, and Quicksilver (http://www.ascension-games.com/blog/2015/9/23/preview-abcs-of-magic-part-5)
Part 6 (Refine Ore, Squire's Aid, and Transfer Enchancement) (http://www.ascension-games.com/blog/2015/9/24/preview-abcs-of-magic-part-6)
Part 7 (Unmake, Vorpal Edge, and Weaken Structure) (http://www.ascension-games.com/blog/2015/9/25/preview-abcs-of-magic-part-7)

[Seginus]

The Path of Iron Technique playtest document is here!

One of the new features being brought in Path of Iron is the addition of new "technique" feats. These feats function much like the style feats that were introduced in Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Ultimate Combat, but are intended for close-range melee combatants like Fighters.

To ensure that these techniques are well-made and usable by players everywhere, I've decided to have a small playtest document for Technique Feats to go along with the main Path of Iron playtest. The document includes all twelve of the Technique feat chains that will be featured in Path of Iron, along with the Technique Master fighter archetype.

You can download the document in this link. (http://www.ascension-games.com/s/Path-of-Iron-Techniques.pdf)

[meemaas]

Quick feedback rules wise. I've only gone through the first chain and wanted to get this out before work started. Angel Techniques bonus granted to an unconscious ally needs to have a different type than dodge. As written, an unconscious or helpless ally actually gets no benefit when targeted because the condition they are disables their Dex to AC and therefore dodge bonuses.

I also have some contention against labeling these as techniques instead of styles, but I'll go into detail on that in another post, if at all.

[Seginus]

Quick feedback rules wise. I've only gone through the first chain and wanted to get this out before work started. Angel Techniques bonus granted to an unconscious ally needs to have a different type than dodge. As written, an unconscious or helpless ally actually gets no benefit when targeted because the condition they are disables their Dex to AC and therefore dodge bonuses.
D'oh! Good catch. I'll have to figure out what typing will be more appropriate. Perhaps a shield bonus.


I also have some contention against labeling these as techniques instead of styles, but I'll go into detail on that in another post, if at all.

Techniques specifically cannot be used alongside styles and cannot be used with unarmed strikes, ever. As such they are covered under a different label.

[Vhaidara]

Asura Motion is still really, really bad, as I commented when you first previewed it. The problem isn't really anything specific to the numbers on the feat itself, and more a fundamental problem with how it works
1. It punishes focus fire, which is the only safe way to deal with enemies (they keep hitting you at full effectiveness until they die)
2. It takes way too long to wind up (4 hits to reach the 3d6 cap)
3. The biggest damage numbers are on your least accurate attacks
4. An issue I just noticed, if you miss it resets (consecutive hits). So, assuming all of your attacks have a 95% chance of hitting (very unlikely for the later iteratives), you still have a 5% chance of losing your momentum.

Further, the feat chain requires Combat Reflexes. But the only feat with any interaction with AoOs is the first one. The other two are reliant on full attacking. In fact, Asura Dance doesn't work at all outside of a full attack.

[Sayt]

I haven't had a comprehensive look at the technique feats yet, but it seems there's something of a pattern of the first feat instantiating a new thing you can do (This, I think is a good thing!) The second feat giving a minor benefit to this, and then the third feat being a gamechanger. This was especially apparent with the Devil technique line. The first and third feat are ones I'd want to take, but I'd only take the second as a feat tax.

Also, I'm confused by the Titan line: the first feat makes it possible to use weapons one size larger with the normal handedness, but increases the penalty from -2 to -4, the second feat walks the penalty back a bit to no penalty (+1 penalty, technically) at BAB+20. The third feat gives you a little extra reach, and you can use weapons two sizes larger but increases the penalty by 2, but the penalty for using oversized weapons in the first place puts another -2 on attack rolls. So the total penalty for a Medium character with the whole of the Titan line using a Huge weapon is -6 to attack, before using power attack. Going up from a 2d6 Medium greatsword to a 4d6 Huge Greatsword is an extra 7 damage. This is a 1-1/7 (average) damage per -1 penalty taken, which doesn't seem like a productive use of feats. On the other hand, I could have misinterpreted Titan Slayer, and it allows you to use a huge weapon at a -4 total (Titan Grip Inclusive), in which case it grants +7 damage for a -4 to hit, which is slightly worse than one-handed power attack, which you can do on top of your normal 2h power attack.

So I suggest a tightening up of language/intent on Titan Technique. If you can get a class-agnostic way of using a massive weapon, that is moderately feat effective, I think that would be quite popular among some demographics (myself included).

[Seginus]

Asura Motion is still really, really bad, as I commented when you first previewed it. The problem isn't really anything specific to the numbers on the feat itself, and more a fundamental problem with how it works
1. It punishes focus fire, which is the only safe way to deal with enemies (they keep hitting you at full effectiveness until they die)
2. It takes way too long to wind up (4 hits to reach the 3d6 cap)
3. The biggest damage numbers are on your least accurate attacks
4. An issue I just noticed, if you miss it resets (consecutive hits). So, assuming all of your attacks have a 95% chance of hitting (very unlikely for the later iteratives), you still have a 5% chance of losing your momentum.

Further, the feat chain requires Combat Reflexes. But the only feat with any interaction with AoOs is the first one. The other two are reliant on full attacking. In fact, Asura Dance doesn't work at all outside of a full attack.

Asura Technique is meant to provide a boost to players that want to strike at multiple foes at a time, not just focus-fire. I know that full-attacking one creature is the best method to win in 90% of cases, but that is not the point of Asura Technique. It is meant to facilitate and strengthen a fighting style based on hitting lots of different things in short order; that's not going to change any time soon.

Now, on the numbers side, I am more than fine making changes. At the very least it's an easy change to Asura Motion that its simply "each attack you make in a round against a different creature" rather than during a full-attack so that the damage bonus applies to any attacks, including AoOs. The consecutive hits thing is just a wording issue and was not intended to "reset" if you miss. It also could be made so the damage boost scales faster (perhaps 2d6 per previous hit, up to 4d6).


I haven't had a comprehensive look at the technique feats yet, but it seems there's something of a pattern of the first feat instantiating a new thing you can do (This, I think is a good thing!) The second feat giving a minor benefit to this, and then the third feat being a gamechanger. This was especially apparent with the Devil technique line. The first and third feat are ones I'd want to take, but I'd only take the second as a feat tax.

It's sort of intentional. As you said, the first feat provides the start of a new ability line, and the third feat is the big hitter than really defines the whole technique. The second feat varies in importance between techniques, but in most cases it's the "bridge" between the start and end, and is supposed to build up for the end of the chain. I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing, and even in the example you provided with Devil Technique the second feat is hardly a tax; it provides the AC/save penalty that the third feat builds upon, and makes bleeding harder to stop, which is huge. Bleed damage is normally not that good since it's otherwise very easy to heal and stop; Devil Pact makes it more reliable as a damaging method.


(Titan Technique stuff)

It's a mistake on my part. I had forgotten that going two sizes up already imposes a -4 penalty and had erroneously included that extra -2 in Titan Slayer. If you use all of the feats together, it is intended that you could wield a Huge 2H weapon at BAB +20 with only a -1 penalty (-2 for Titan Technique, -4 from the weapon being two sizes too large, +5 from Titan Grip). I'll be sure to correct that and clean up the language a bit.

The numbers with Titan Technique (and not Grip or Slayer) should be:

Large 1H-weapon in one hand: -2 penalty
Large 2H-weapon in two hands: -4 penalty

With Titan Slayer:

Large 1H-weapon in one hand: -2 penalty
Large 2H-weapon in two hands: -4 penalty
Huge 1H-weapon in one hand: -4 penalty
Huge 2H-weapon in two hands: -6 penalty

At BAB +20, those numbers are reduced by 5 each from Titan Grip.

[Vhaidara]

I get the idea behind it, but you may recall in the previous thread (kickstarter advertisement, IIRC) I ran damage sims for it against Weapon Specialization, known to be a very low standard for feats. And Weapon Spec had a worrying tendency to match it, and exceed it at many points, since it doesn't load your damage onto the back end of your iteratives. Remember, every time you move down an iterative, you lose effectively 25% of your damage to accuracy. And this is worse, because you need those hits to build up for later attacks. It's fairly well acknowledged that by the time you hit level 11, your last attack is basically a Hail Mary shot (did I just use a football term?)

Also, why are these restricted to weapons? I don't seem a compelling reason for locking monks out of something like Asura Technique. Especially since when I think of that kind of fighting, the image (not the reality) of a Monk is what usually springs to mind. Further, the Unchained Monk is actually one of the very few classes I could actually see myself taking Asura Motion on, since I can take Combat Reflexes as a Monk feat and the UnFlurry gives me several attacks at my highest BAB.

I do think the ideas you're mentioning are a very good step in the right direction. Faster scaling means you are less dependent on there being at least 3-4 enemies (and are less punished for your allies focusing fire). Not losing the bonus is good. Not locking it into full attacks gives it synergy with Combat Reflexes, and actually makes it decent on a lockdown AoO build, maybe a Whip+Form Kineticist.

[Seginus]

I get the idea behind it, but you may recall in the previous thread (kickstarter advertisement, IIRC) I ran damage sims for it against Weapon Specialization, known to be a very low standard for feats. And Weapon Spec had a worrying tendency to match it, and exceed it at many points, since it doesn't load your damage onto the back end of your iteratives. Remember, every time you move down an iterative, you lose effectively 25% of your damage to accuracy. And this is worse, because you need those hits to build up for later attacks. It's fairly well acknowledged that by the time you hit level 11, your last attack is basically a Hail Mary shot (did I just use a football term?)

Well the previous comparison you did factored in that the original feat had Dodge and Mobility as prerequisites, which have been removed. Also, damage is not the only factor in this feat chain, since it also negates the attack bonus against you for flanking, grants +4 dodge AC for moving, and lets you move 10 feet after each attack you make without provoking AoOs from the creature you hit. The movement helps set up flanking with allies quickly which helps with overall damage output, especially if you rely on flanking for damage (Slayer, Rogue). So isolating just the damage as if that's the only thing the feat gives isn't a good comparison.


Also, why are these restricted to weapons? I don't seem a compelling reason for locking monks out of something like Asura Technique. Especially since when I think of that kind of fighting, the image (not the reality) of a Monk is what usually springs to mind. Further, the Unchained Monk is actually one of the very few classes I could actually see myself taking Asura Motion on, since I can take Combat Reflexes as a Monk feat and the UnFlurry gives me several attacks at my highest BAB.

Because that's what it's intended for, and there's not a good mechanical way to represent it through prerequisites. Styles are intended for unarmed strikes, and as such almost universally mention making unarmed attacks or have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite. However, there's not a good way to write this in the requirements of each technique or in their description so it's applied as a blanket statement. It also helps keep it more narrowed down for balance reasons when you can't use Styles and Techniques together, especially for archetypes like Master of Many Styles.

And Unchained Monk can still learn techniques, they'd just have to use one of their numerous monk weapons to do so.

I do think the ideas you're mentioning are a very good step in the right direction. Faster scaling means you are less dependent on there being at least 3-4 enemies (and are less punished for your allies focusing fire). Not losing the bonus is good. Not locking it into full attacks gives it synergy with Combat Reflexes, and actually makes it decent on a lockdown AoO build, maybe a Whip+Form Kineticist.

Most of those fixes are going to be implemented. Depending on the volume of feedback I get on these will determine whether I do a second round test.

[Vhaidara]

Well the previous comparison you did factored in that the original feat had Dodge and Mobility as prerequisites, which have been removed. Also, damage is not the only factor in this feat chain, since it also negates the attack bonus against you for flanking, grants +4 dodge AC for moving, and lets you move 10 feet after each attack you make without provoking AoOs from the creature you hit. The movement helps set up flanking with allies quickly which helps with overall damage output, especially if you rely on flanking for damage (Slayer, Rogue). So isolating just the damage as if that's the only thing the feat gives isn't a good comparison.

No, it is a good comparison, because I'm comparing Asura Motion to Weapon Specialization. Before, AM had a higher cost on top of being worse. Now the costs are similar (2/3 solid feats vs 1 bad feat), but the comparison of damage values is unchanged.


Because that's what it's intended for, and there's not a good mechanical way to represent it through prerequisites. Styles are intended for unarmed strikes, and as such almost universally mention making unarmed attacks or have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite. However, there's not a good way to write this in the requirements of each technique or in their description so it's applied as a blanket statement. It also helps keep it more narrowed down for balance reasons when you can't use Styles and Techniques together, especially for archetypes like Master of Many Styles.

Why not just say that you can't use them at the same time? The restriction is completely and totally arbitrary. I personally disagree with Style feats being unarmed only, and hold the third party devs to a higher standard, since you guys are actually competent. I expect better than Paizo from you guys.


And Unchained Monk can still learn techniques, they'd just have to use one of their numerous monk weapons to do so.

Not really. The biggest thing that Unchained Monk got is the Style Strikes, which are (again, arbitrarily and in very, very bad thinking by Paizo) unarmed only. In fact, they are limited to punches, kicks, and headbutts. You know, the things that are entirely flavor.

Sorry, I'm still salty about this.

[meemaas]

Techniques specifically cannot be used alongside styles and cannot be used with unarmed strikes, ever. As such they are covered under a different label.



Because that's what it's intended for, and there's not a good mechanical way to represent it through prerequisites. Styles are intended for unarmed strikes, and as such almost universally mention making unarmed attacks or have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite. However, there's not a good way to write this in the requirements of each technique or in their description so it's applied as a blanket statement. It also helps keep it more narrowed down for balance reasons when you can't use Styles and Techniques together, especially for archetypes like Master of Many Styles.

And Unchained Monk can still learn techniques, they'd just have to use one of their numerous monk weapons to do so.



What Mechanical reason is there to limit techniques from being used with unarmed strikes? Reading through them, there's very few techniques that actually cannot be used with unarmed strikes besides the restriction.

There's precedence for at least one style (from Paizo) that can be used with any weapon, even if it had the prereq IUS. There's no reason to act under the umbrella that style feats HAVE to be used with unarmed strikes, especially when other developers have followed through with it.

By making these into styles, you cut out the necessary wording required to differentiate between Techniques and Styles, while also opening them up to a bit more freedom in building and combinations, especially with the reworking done to Master of Many Styles that killed half of its abuse.

This isn't to say you can't have the Technique master, having an alternative to the MoMS that is more likely to use weapon based strategies, having better proficiencies to work from, while also allowing MoMS's that want to use weapons to take advantage of Technniques with their chassis.

I'm sorry if i'm not making 100% sense and/or jumping around. I stop functioning at night.

On another note, Inevitable Justice needs some cleaning up.


You may use the strike provided by Inevitable Justice with the benefit of Vital Strike, Improved Vital Strike, Greater Vital Strike, or Spring Attack, but only when making a normal attack (not an attack of opportunity)

It seems contradictory, implying that you can use it with those feats, but then that you can only do it when making a normal attack. If you just mean that it can't be used with those feats when making an attack of opportunity, just specify it cannot be used as an attack of opportunity. Otherwise it needs cleaned up to verify exactly what it is intended to be used for.

[Sayt]

Okay, it's the weekend, so I can give the Technique feats a more comprehensive going over.

Angel Technique, et al: Remarkably solid, and a great way to actually tank for a group. I do wish to play a reach Warder which uses this line. Can the Angel Retaliation attack be substituted for a combat maneuver as normal? As other's have mentioned, helpless foes can't actually benefit from dodge bonuses.

Archon Technique, et al: Tower Shields?! Actually usable?! Fantastic! No complaints, excellently executed. I'm not sure what the benefit of Archon Defense counting as Double Slice. What does that actually qualify you for? Never the less, a Tower Shield and a shortsword is now actually a semi-viable weapon combination for TWFing (or at least no worse than Dual short swords).

Asura Technique: Dodge Bonuses always stack, you don't need to state that in every feat. And I agree with Keledrath, the extra damage isn't enough, in my opinion. A perhaps somewhat radical idea is that when you reach Asura Dance, you don't take iterative attack penalties on attacks that strike a target you haven't hit that round?

Bebilith Technique: the text of the feat is pretty good, it gets around one of the flaws in Sunder Combat Maneuvers: it eats your damage dealt to the enemy. However, the context of the feat is a little... screwy. Because to have the feat requires three feat slots, and at level four, two attacks at that level is only going to be a fighter or a natural weapon martial. Bebilith claw is a neat idea, but the weapon damage restriction is weird. For example, you can't put a crack in a Dragon Turtle's shell, or shatter a crabs exoskeleton. Also just one point seems too slight a reward. I'd perhaps go up to one point of reduction per 20 points of damage that you would have otherwise done (or per 10 points of damage lost to bebilith claw, same math. Remember, 1 point of AC is a 5% increase in AC, if they were within your ability to hit on a 19).

Demon Technique*: Well, the main thing I see about this feat is that whips are already light weapons. Other than that, it has four pre-requisites, itself the fifth feat, and a hidden prerequisite of Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Whip). Demon Grasp and Lash seem decent, but only grappling on a crit one a 20/2 crit weapon seems... well, I don't feel it's going to come up often enough to be relevant and justify the incredibly heavy feat requirements. I recommend allowing you to sacrifice your offhand attack/s with a whip to make and maintain grappling with it, while leaving your onhand attacks.

Devil Technique*: The need to hit twice in one round in BAB four is a problem that first arrived in Bebilith technique. Otherwise, I've said my piece about this line. (Although, see Footnote at the bottom of this post Assuming I remember to write it

Inevitable Technique: This is certainly novel. Inevitable order's Once Per Creature per Day is Probably a sensible precaution, as Just keeping alternating between Order and Justice is going to leave a sour taste in the mouth of the person who always seems to get hit and then can't roll higher than 9.

Kami Technique: Kami Ward is an incredibly cool effect.

Protean Technique: ...interesting. I would perhaps allow Protean Chaos to threaten a critical (But not vorpal). A 20/30% chance of getting an effect seems perhaps a little low.

Rakshasa Technique: Very cool, like Improved Two Weapon Feint before it got Fixed/nerfed. This will probably be quite popular among TWF Rogues and Slayers. It might make Beastmorph Vivisectionists even better but the increase to their capacity is only really theoretically concerning, as they are already ludicrous and can get their sneak attacks easily enough.

Shinigami Technique: This is better than I thought at first, but I'm not sold on this being worth it. Coup de graces need an enabler like pre-nerf Merciless Butchery to be worth focusing on, as the only real targets there are to CDG are opponents that have been knocked out of fights already and are bleeding out, and spells like Sleep and Deep Slumber take too long to cast and have restrictive HD caps.

Technique Master: Personally I'd still allow a fighter to take normal combat feats in his 1/2/6/10/14/18 bonus feat slots, especially as a lot of techniques have hidden costs/incentivise other expensive combat styles. That said, wildcard slots are something I do love the concept of, and I'd perhaps allow any bonus feat slot after 6th to be a wildcard slot.

*On the subject of the naming only of Demon and Devil technique: I am slightly torn, to be honest. Bleeding attacks are very much a signiture of Devils, and Whip and Blade does call back to Balors very strongly (And the Balrog of Morgoth it calls back to (I have a poster of it on my wall!)). On the other hand, whips have a strong association with oppression which I feel goes hand in hand with the Lawful Evil nature of Devils and phrases like the "Lash of the Dictator", and a ripping and tearing combat style is just something I associate with demons more than devils. This is of course subjective aesthetics and not a comment on the quality of the work.

On the subject of Techniques versus Styles... honestly it just seems like a semantic distinction. Crane Style is just as good for Swashbucklers as it is for Unarmed monks. I have a now-defunct Slayer Build that used a Ki Intesifying Tri-bladed Katar and Mantis Style to Stun and CDG enemies. I somewhat feel that these feats are style feats in every sense that matters, that simply require weapons. Although, that does seem somewhat nebulous: Is it sufficient to wield a manufactured weapon to use these styles, but then make IUSs to gain their benefits? Is a monk's unarmed strike, counting as manufactured weapon sufficient to gain the benefit of Inevitable Style? (Ironically, a Marut Inevitable cannot benefit from Inevitable Technque, having only slams) What about Demon Lash wouldn't conceptually work using a tentacle to grapple in place of a whip?

As a whole, however, I did just become a lot more interested in this project.

[Seginus]

Can the Angel Retaliation attack be substituted for a combat maneuver as normal?
Hmm. It doesn't explicitly say so, and was more intended for direct damage (hence the extra +1d8), but I suppose you could if you wanted to.

I'm not sure what the benefit of Archon Defense counting as Double Slice. What does that actually qualify you for?
At the very least it's one of the requirements for Two-Weapon Rend. Not a major benefit, but since the feat essentially does what Double Slice does I figured it's alright to let it count.

A perhaps somewhat radical idea is that when you reach Asura Dance, you don't take iterative attack penalties on attacks that strike a target you haven't hit that round?
I have considered also giving a stacking attack bonus for each attack you make against a different target so the later attacks aren't as much of a "Hail Mary" as Keledrath put it.

Bebilith Technique: the text of the feat is pretty good, it gets around one of the flaws in Sunder Combat Maneuvers: it eats your damage dealt to the enemy. However, the context of the feat is a little... screwy. Because to have the feat requires three feat slots, and at level four, two attacks at that level is only going to be a fighter or a natural weapon martial. Bebilith claw is a neat idea, but the weapon damage restriction is weird. For example, you can't put a crack in a Dragon Turtle's shell, or shatter a crabs exoskeleton. Also just one point seems too slight a reward. I'd perhaps go up to one point of reduction per 20 points of damage that you would have otherwise done (or per 10 points of damage lost to bebilith claw, same math. Remember, 1 point of AC is a 5% increase in AC, if they were within your ability to hit on a 19).
Fighters having the easiest access to techniques is intentional. The weapon restriction was meant to emulate bebilth claws (which can deal slashing or piercing damage, usually).
I don't think one point of AC penalty is too slight of a reward. As you mentioned with Angel Technique you can normally substitute attacks with combat maneuvers, meaning someone could easily be attempting 4-7 sunder checks each round at higher levels. If more than one hit connects that reduction adds up fast.

Demon Technique*: Well, the main thing I see about this feat is that whips are already light weapons. Other than that, it has four pre-requisites, itself the fifth feat, and a hidden prerequisite of Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Whip). Demon Grasp and Lash seem decent, but only grappling on a crit one a 20/2 crit weapon seems... well, I don't feel it's going to come up often enough to be relevant and justify the incredibly heavy feat requirements. I recommend allowing you to sacrifice your offhand attack/s with a whip to make and maintain grappling with it, while leaving your onhand attacks.
Whips are not light weapons, they are one-handed weapons. The grapple on crit is a bonus; Greater Whip Mastery already lets you grapple with a whip in normal circumstances.


Devil Technique*: The need to hit twice in one round in BAB four is a problem that first arrived in Bebilith technique. Otherwise, I've said my piece about this line.
Again, fighters having an easier time with Techniques is intended, and someone at this level could easily pick up Two-Weapon Fighting, Power Attack, and Devil Technique by level 4 so they can use it immediately.

Protean Technique: ...interesting. I would perhaps allow Protean Chaos to threaten a critical (But not vorpal). A 20/30% chance of getting an effect seems perhaps a little low.
Do note that it is 30% chance per attack; much like with Bebilith Technique, each individual strike is a smaller benefit but when you are making 4-7 attacks each round there's a decent chance of getting one or two triggers per round.

Shinigami Technique: This is better than I thought at first, but I'm not sold on this being worth it. Coup de graces need an enabler like pre-nerf Merciless Butchery to be worth focusing on, as the only real targets there are to CDG are opponents that have been knocked out of fights already and are bleeding out, and spells like Sleep and Deep Slumber take too long to cast and have restrictive HD caps.
Paralyzed creatures are also considered helpless, so if the wizard is using spells like hold person it can be an easy kill. Coup de grace aren't the exact focus of this technique; it's more on sweeping hits with Whirlwind Attack and killing foes in general, which I think it does well.

On the subject of Techniques versus Styles... honestly it just seems like a semantic distinction. Crane Style is just as good for Swashbucklers as it is for Unarmed monks. I have a now-defunct Slayer Build that used a Ki Intesifying Tri-bladed Katar and Mantis Style to Stun and CDG enemies. I somewhat feel that these feats are style feats in every sense that matters, that simply require weapons. Although, that does seem somewhat nebulous: Is it sufficient to wield a manufactured weapon to use these styles, but then make IUSs to gain their benefits? Is a monk's unarmed strike, counting as manufactured weapon sufficient to gain the benefit of Inevitable Style? (Ironically, a Marut Inevitable cannot benefit from Inevitable Technque, having only slams) What about Demon Lash wouldn't conceptually work using a tentacle to grapple in place of a whip?
It is semantics, sure. Techniques were designed with Fighters in mind as their primary users (hence the Technique Master being for them), much like styles were designed with monks as their intended users. That's one of the reasons they aren't classified as Styles, since not only does it make it less special for Fighters (which otherwise are treated as the bottom of the barrel, especially after Pathfinder Unchained) but also it helps keep technique combinations via Technique Master more controllable. If they were styles, then they could be fused with style feats by a Master of Many Styles monk and cause unintended effects that I did not design nor plan for, some of which would undoubtedly cause contradictory rules or lead to ridiculous combinations.

However, I still wanted Techniques to be available to other martial characters, even if they would have a harder time obtaining them. But how do you write that in the feat's description?

Some of the Techniques were easy for this, since they specifically focus on a type of weapon (Archon, Demon, Kami, Shinigami, and Titan). But the remaining ones had no way to distinguish it in feat requirements. Styles have it easy by requiring Improved Unarmed Strike and explicitly stating the use of unarmed attacks, but when you want the requirement to be "everything except Unarmed Strikes" there's no way to write it easily. Hence the blanket statement that all techniques have to be used with manufactured weapons.

Is it an elegant or flawless solution? No. But it works for its intended purpose. And even if I do allow some of these Techniques to work with unarmed strikes (which, don't get me wrong, I am taking this suggestion into consideration, even if I'm not a fan of it), they still won't be reclassified as styles for the aforementioned reasons.

[Vhaidara]

Again, fighters having an easier time with Techniques is intended, and someone at this level could easily pick up Two-Weapon Fighting, Power Attack, and Devil Technique by level 4 so they can use it immediately.

Almost no builds, especially Fighter builds, will be taking both of these. If you are not a ranger/slayer, and are going for TWF, you need a 15 Dex, which encourages Piranha Strike, not Power Attack. Further, there is 0 synergy/interaction between Power Attack and Devil Technique. I see absolutely no connection between the two.

The point I think you need to consider for allowing unarmed is this: What will it hurt? How does it break the game that a Monk who spends the feats, and could use it with monk weapons, can use it with his fists? Manufactured weapons already have pretty much every advantage all the time (bigger damage dice, better crit stats, lower feat/class investment, special abilities, special materials, easier/cheaper to enchant). The idea of Style feats was to give unarmed strike some much needed love. Manufactured Weapons don't NEED that boost over unarmed strikes.

I just don't see any reason, mechanically, to make the restriction. And if there isn't a mechanical reason, than what you're doing is telling people how to play by saying that, for arbitrary reasons, they can't use these things together. I object to that on the same grounds that I object to "Monks must be lawful" and "Barbarians can't be lawful" and 3.5's "Bard's can't be lawful". Oh, and 3.5's "Warlocks must be Chaotic or Evil", even though they can explicitly be inherited powers, just like sorcerers.

[Sayt]

At the very least it's one of the requirements for Two-Weapon Rend. Not a major benefit, but since the feat essentially does what Double Slice does I figured it's alright to let it count.
A weird mental image, but it's a nice caveat to have.



Fighters having the easiest access to techniques is intentional. The weapon restriction was meant to emulate bebilth claws (which can deal slashing or piercing damage, usually).
I don't think one point of AC penalty is too slight of a reward. As you mentioned with Angel Technique you can normally substitute attacks with combat maneuvers, meaning someone could easily be attempting 4-7 sunder checks each round at higher levels. If more than one hit connects that reduction adds up fast.

The problem with that is that you then you start losing damage.



Whips are not light weapons, they are one-handed weapons. The grapple on crit is a bonus; Greater Whip Mastery already lets you grapple with a whip in normal circumstances. Yes, but you can't maintain that grapple and make a full attack with your main-hand weapon. What I'm suggesting is that when you make a full attack, you can go Sword, sword-5, Sword-10, Whip[Grapple], and then subsequently Sword, sword-5, Sword-10, Whip[Maintain Grapple], [Subsequent Whip attacks unavailable while using to grapple].



Whips are not light weapons, they are one-handed weapons. The grapple on crit is a bonus; Greater Whip Mastery already lets you grapple with a whip in normal circumstances.
Oh right, I forgot that whips are only light weapons if you cover them in blades (ie, Scorpion Whip, because that makes sense, right?)



Again, fighters having an easier time with Techniques is intended, and someone at this level could easily pick up Two-Weapon Fighting, Power Attack, and Devil Technique by level 4 so they can use it immediately.


As Keledrath mentions, Fighters might have the feat slots, but unless they have above average stats, they're not going to be in a position to qualify for both. Dex 15 is roughly half your point buy allocation on a non-dex race at a 15 point buy. Throw in another five points for Con 14, and 3 points in strength for 13 and you can get all four of those feats, but you're not going to be accurate or hard hitting, and you're going to have poor mental attributes cutting you out from a good will save, skill points or charisma to face with (even if you had the skills). (I prefer 20 point buy, but IIRC 15 averages to similar to 4d6 best three)



Do note that it is 30% chance per attack; much like with Bebilith Technique, each individual strike is a smaller benefit but when you are making 4-7 attacks each round there's a decent chance of getting one or two triggers per round.

Point well made! It certainly does encourage TWFing.




Is it an elegant or flawless solution? No. But it works for its intended purpose. And even if I do allow some of these Techniques to work with unarmed strikes (which, don't get me wrong, I am taking this suggestion into consideration, even if I'm not a fan of it), they still won't be reclassified as styles for the aforementioned reasons.

Well, consideration is all I can ask for really. Basically, my view is that where there isn't a specific weapon or weapon type that needs to be used (such as in Archon Technique tree), there should be an obvious reason why it doesn't work. What about Devil technique lets me bleed someone with a kerambit, but not talons, given that they have similar damage dice, shape, etc? What part of Inevitable Technique makes it work with a greatclub but not a Slam?

[Seginus]

The Path of Iron playtest is coming to a close!

Path of Iron is entering its final few weeks of development time, and as such the playtest will soon be closing. While the documents will still be available for your viewing, two weeks from today (November 6, 2015) I will stop taking feedback and suggestions from the playtest. If you have any suggestions, please do not hesitate to share!

Path of Iron - Playtest (http://www.ascension-games.com/blog/2015/8/4/path-of-iron-playtest-is-live)

Path of Iron - Technique Playtest (http://www.ascension-games.com/blog/2015/10/1/the-path-of-iron-technique-playtest-is-here)

[Seginus]

The Path of Iron playtest is now closed! And the reason for that is...

Path of Iron, the next book in the "Path" series by Ascension Games, will be releasing on November 20th, 2015! You can read up on more of the details of its release on the Ascension Games blog (http://www.ascension-games.com/blog/2015/11/6/path-of-iron-releases-on-november-20th-2015).

Backers of the Path of Iron Kickstarter will receive their PDF copies on Wednesday, November 18th. Print editions will be sent out in the weeks following the book's release.