PDA

View Full Version : Hit your enemy 95% of the time, every time.



Person_Man
2007-07-22, 01:03 PM
The Combo:

Pyrokinesticist (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/prestigeClasses/pyrokineticist.htm): One level gives you the Fire Lash, a whip which allows you to hit with touch attacks.

Ring of Blinking (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/rings.htm#blinking): On command (standard action) activates the Blink (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/blink.htm) spell for 5 rounds. Physical attacks against you have a 50% miss chance, and the Blind-Fight feat doesn’t help opponents, since you’re ethereal and not merely invisible. If the attack is capable of striking ethereal creatures, the miss chance is only 20% (for concealment). You strike as an invisible creature (with a +2 bonus on attack rolls), denying your target any Dexterity bonus to AC.

Mage Slayer feat: From Complete Arcane. Spellcasters you threaten may not cast defensively. Taking this feat reduces your caster level for all your spells and spell-like abilities by 4. Required for...

Pierce Magical Concealment feat: Also Comp Arcane. You disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell-like abilities such as darkness, blur, invisibility, obscuring mist, ghostform, and spells when used to create concealment effects. Taking this feat reduces your caster level for all your spells and spell-like abilities by 4. Finally, you take...

Pierce Magical Protection feat: Also Comp Arcane. As a standard action you can make a melee attack that ignores any bonuses to Armor Class granted by spells (including potions and wands). If you deal damage to your opponent, you also instantly and automatically dispel all that opponent's spells and spell effects that grant a bonus to Armor Class. Taking this feat reduces your caster level for all your spells and spell-like abilities by 4.

Put it all together, and when you attack you ignore Armor, Shields, Natural Armor, Dex bonus, Dodge bonus, and magical concealment, including the 20% miss chance you have due to your own Ring of Blinking. If your enemy happens to have a spell effect that you don't normally bypass, you can take a standard action to ignore it and automatically dispel all that opponent's spells and spell effects that grant a bonus to Armor Class.

How to milk it for all its worth:
In most cases, you will now hit every time you roll to attack, unless you roll a natural 1. There are a few defenses you can't bypass, like a Monk's bonus to AC, but they're pretty minimal and should be well below your normal To-Hit bonus in most cases.

Your enemy is quite easy to hit, so you can max out Power Attack and Leap Attack without having to worry about taking Improved Bull Rush->Shock Trooper, and the low AC it entails.

Your enemy is denied their Dex bonus, so you can max out Sneak Attack, though this doesn't scale as well as Power Attack.

And there are any number of feats that will further add to your fun: Headlong Rush, Spirited Charge, Combat Reflexes, Karmic Strike, Hold the Line, Knock-Down, Knockback, Robilar's Gambit, etc.

The reduced caster level from the Mage Slayer feats don't effect manifester level. That means you can go Psychic Warrior or Psion 5/Pyro 1/PrC X or Psychic and get 19/20 manifester levels. This allows you to add all sorts of interesting powers to your attacks, and/or to diversify and add alternative attacks and defenses.

Or you're willing to spend a feat on Wild Talent to qualify for Pyrokinesticist, you can enter as a Paladin of Freedom (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm), to boost your Saves, gain access to all those tasty Divine and Domain feats, and maybe pick up a special mount. After that, you can head into a good PrC like Cavalier.

Or you can pick up the Tome of Battle and head use maneuvers to boost your combat ability.

If you're afraid of Fire Immune enemies, you can be a variant Pyrokineticist (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20040625e), and use Acid or Sonic damage.

Why it's balanced:
OK, compared to most builds, it ain't. I won't argue with that. But if your party is playing all full casters and ToB classes, it is.

First, you need to spend a standard action to use your Ring of Blinking, or have a party member cast Greater Invisibility, or you can use Mass Cloud Mind. But one way or another, you're not necessarily going to go first in the round, and even if you do you have to spend time to prepare your combo or risk missing enemies and leaving yourself vulnerable to attack.

Plus, just like everyone else, you're vulnerable to Dispel Magic and anti-magic areas. Though luckily, you'll have your psionics to fall back on if something like that happens.

Furthermore, just like when you play a high powered PC in a gestalt game, you're still limited by Initiative and the number of actions you can take per round. Hustle will help, but for the most part, you this build can't or won't utilize Celerity, White Raven Tactics, Cunning Surge, Perpetual Options, or Time Stop. So even though you can pretty much hit and probably kill anything in 1 round, you can only do so much in that one round, while your DM is free to always add more enemies.


Thoughts? Suggested builds? Suggested feats? Best psionic powers to use with it? Does anyone play in a high powered campaign where they might actually use this?

Jerthanis
2007-07-22, 01:38 PM
Thoughts? Suggested builds? Suggested feats? Best psionic powers to use with it? Does anyone play in a high powered campaign where they might actually use this?

A good combo, and the core of it I don't really see a problem with, but as long as your DM is using the Magic-Psionics transparency rule, the penalty to Caster Level applies to your Manifester Level as well. I don't see why that stops you from doing this idea with naturally psionic races and ToB classes though.

It seems like this is balanced in terms of excessively high-powered teams, but if this were run in an average powered game, it'd be kind of overly strong I think.

Also, if your opponent had uncanny dodge, they'd probably keep their dex bonus to AC, for what that's worth.

Anxe
2007-07-22, 01:39 PM
That's evil. You are an evil man. You are like your signature, amazingly evil. The next time I make a Pyrokinetcist he is doing that stuff. For sure. I'm gonna be evil like you.

The Glyphstone
2007-07-22, 01:43 PM
Yeah - the only flaw I can see is Psi/Magic Transparency, but if that's not in effect, it's very effective indeed. The other basic problem is that Fire Lash does a ridiculously low 1d8 damage, but as you mentioned, Power/Sneak Attack helps, as would powers and other things to boost it.

Mr Pants
2007-07-22, 02:43 PM
The pyrokineticist ability you're speaking of, fire lash, uses a ranged touch attack and deals a measly 1d8 damage in each attack. You also couldn't power attack with it because its a ranged attack and theres no way to improve the damage of it. Personally I'd rather have an attack that hit less often but I could power attack with and actually did some damage worth-while.

Aside from that the build is fantastic. I love it, mostly because it kicks casters in the teeth.

Jack Mann
2007-07-22, 03:14 PM
A whip is still a melee weapon, though it acts in many ways like a ranged weapon.

Psi-magic transparency does not affect feats. Otherwise, practiced spellcaster would work on psionics, and there would be no need for practiced manifester. The psi-magic transparency section of the SRD is quite specific on what is and isn't affected.

deadseashoals
2007-07-22, 03:24 PM
Are you not playing with psionics-magic transparency? The Mage Slayer feat chain reduces both caster and manifester level in the default rules (with transparency). Which would also affect your manifester level for Fire Lash, since it's a psi-like ability.

ShneekeyTheLost
2007-07-22, 03:27 PM
There's a slight problem with it...


Fire Lash (Ps)
A pyrokineticist gains the ability to fashion a 15-foot-long whip of fire from unstable ectoplasm as a move-equivalent action. She takes no damage from a fire lash she creates, and if she releases her hold, it immediately dissipates. The lash deals 1d8 points of fire damage to a target within 15 feet on a successful ranged touch attack. A pyro can take Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization (if she otherwise meets the prerequisites) in conjunction with the fire lash, as well as any feats that apply to the use of a standard whip. The whip remains in existence as long as the pyrokineticist holds it.

It isn't a real weapon, it is a fire lash. It is not a physical weapon. This means you can do touch attacks instead of regular attacks. This means you don't add Str damage, nor will Power Attack have any effect on it. So you're doing a flat 1d8 fire damage. If you run across anything immune to fire... tough luck.
Also, it's a psi-like ability... that means catapsi or other things which inhibit manifestation screws you over.

Find another way to continuously do touch attacks consistantly and it'll be a lot better.

Cute trick, though...

Thinker
2007-07-22, 03:28 PM
Aside from that the build is fantastic. I love it, mostly because it kicks casters in the teeth.

How does it kick casters in the teeth? Its a good build, but its not a good build that negates other builds.

Jack Mann
2007-07-22, 03:28 PM
Again, this is not true. Read the description of psionics-magic transparency. Feats that affect spells do not affect psionics.

EDIT:
There's a slight problem with it...



It isn't a real weapon, it is a fire lash. It is not a physical weapon. This means you can do touch attacks instead of regular attacks. This means you don't add Str damage, nor will Power Attack have any effect on it. So you're doing a flat 1d8 fire damage. If you run across anything immune to fire... tough luck.
Also, it's a psi-like ability... that means catapsi or other things which inhibit manifestation screws you over.

Find another way to continuously do touch attacks consistantly and it'll be a lot better.

Cute trick, though...

It says that all feats that can be used in conjunction with a whip can be used with the fire lash. This includes power attack.

Fax Celestis
2007-07-22, 03:30 PM
It isn't a real weapon, it is a fire lash. It is not a physical weapon. This means you can do touch attacks instead of regular attacks. This means you don't add Str damage, nor will Power Attack have any effect on it. So you're doing a flat 1d8 fire damage. If you run across anything immune to fire... tough luck.

Incorrect. According to what you yourself quoted:


Fire Lash (Ps)
A pyrokineticist gains the ability to fashion a 15-foot-long whip of fire from unstable ectoplasm as a move-equivalent action. She takes no damage from a fire lash she creates, and if she releases her hold, it immediately dissipates. The lash deals 1d8 points of fire damage to a target within 15 feet on a successful ranged touch attack. A pyro can take Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization (if she otherwise meets the prerequisites) in conjunction with the fire lash, as well as any feats that apply to the use of a standard whip. The whip remains in existence as long as the pyrokineticist holds it.

Power attack applies to standard whip use.

Mr Pants
2007-07-22, 03:34 PM
How does it kick casters in the teeth? Its a good build, but its not a good build that negates other builds.

It negates all magical buffs and armor enhancements with a hit. Seems like that would affect a caster a lot.

lord_khaine
2007-07-22, 03:59 PM
nahh, usualy if you get close enough to actualy hit a caster you will hit anyway.
and this build doesnt at the basic lv help in any way against things like mirrior image, fly, the targeting part of invisibility (the annoying part) or protection from fire.

and as for the mage slayer chain, yes it says only caster lv, though im pretty sure RAI would be manifester lv as well.
then again, you doesnt really need those feats anyway, the situations where they would be usefull are so few, and with even a halfway decent bab you would hit most of the time anyway.

to take this a step further, though the rink of blinking is pretty decent, i would proberly spend the gold on something like wings of flying instead, or boots of speed.

Jack Mann
2007-07-22, 04:12 PM
The mage slayer line doesn't affect manifester level for much the same reason you can't overchannel spells.

Zherog
2007-07-22, 04:42 PM
nahh, usualy if you get close enough to actualy hit a caster you will hit anyway.
and this build doesnt at the basic lv help in any way against things like mirrior image, fly, the targeting part of invisibility (the annoying part) or protection from fire.

It certainly helps with mirror image as one of the Complete Arcane feats (I'm too lazy to go look it up) makes it so you automatically know which is the real target and which are the images.

Behold_the_Void
2007-07-22, 04:54 PM
Would power attack do the same energy damage as the lash? As I recall, sneak attack would.

lord_khaine
2007-07-22, 06:24 PM
yes as i understand it would be fire damage.

and Jack, i know the feat doesnt say manifester lv, what im saying is i belive it was the intension, since the hit to caster lv is the balancing factor of a very powerfull feat, and the wizard writers usualy dont think about psionic when the write new books ect.

Thinker
2007-07-22, 07:01 PM
yes as i understand it would be fire damage.

and Jack, i know the feat doesnt say manifester lv, what im saying is i belive it was the intension, since the hit to caster lv is the balancing factor of a very powerfull feat, and the wizard writers usualy dont think about psionic when the write new books ect.

We have a separate feat to increase ML and one for CL. Manifesters can overchannel, casters cannot. ML is not the same as CL. It is not the only balancing factor of the feat that is only powerful under certain circumstances. They are different. Transparency does not make both systems entirely equal in every way.

Wolfbite
2007-07-22, 07:26 PM
That's...cute.
Whoever said about that build being a nice trick was dead on.
A lot of those custom, "I'm Joe the Master Tripper, It's all I do!" builds don't interest me...They are so specific and can end up pigeon holeing a player. There is a chance you may just want to reach outside your "awesome" flamewhip attacks...even if psionics aren't casters for the sake of caster level reduction feats, doesn't help you that much.
A ring of blink does run out, the anti-psionic anti-magic stuff was mentioned, immunities...The success on these builds depends so much on your GM it's ridiculous. I can see the Flame Lasher being useful for his flame lash in the easiest to low end moderate encounters, if it's just generic rolled material.

Unless of course these brainchilds are for the vidoegames? I can see how that would be the most boring endeavor ever.

I got a build to contribute, it's called, Master Dice Roller It relies solely on your GM's ability to let you roll dice. A tough set of circumstances to meet I know, but it is worth it!
The next step is to roll a 20 on every skill check, attack roll, saving throw...pretty much any roll involving the d20 You'll find that provided you have the hit points, the AC, and the save bonuses, you'll be able to do anything within your EL range! Massive damage crits, overcome spells, dodge that Tiamat's multi-breath attacks! Find the hidden doors, convince the king to let you marry his 5 daughters, make any skill check untrained (not including skills that are barred from your class though, I know it's ok...) You also should not die (that is what your other party members are for). You will be the star of the game. It's fool proof you can not go wrong!

Zherog
2007-07-22, 07:53 PM
A ring of blink does run out...

Elaborate, please? Are you talking about the duration ending? If so, you just re-activate it... So you have to spend a standard action every 7 rounds.

SadisticFishing
2007-07-22, 08:17 PM
Blinking isn't "concealment" at all. That last bit doesn't work.

Stephen_E
2007-07-22, 09:01 PM
Blinking isn't "concealment" at all. That last bit doesn't work.

Reread the spell Blink. It specifically makes clear that Blink is in part concealment. From the SRD -
--------
Physical attacks against you have a 50% miss chance, and the Blind-Fight feat doesn’t help opponents, since you’re ethereal and not merely invisible. If the attack is capable of striking ethereal creatures, the miss chance is only 20% (for concealment).
-------------

Stephen

SadisticFishing
2007-07-22, 09:04 PM
That sentence is self-contradictory.

Dhavaer
2007-07-22, 09:08 PM
That sentence is self-contradictory.

Then where is the contradiction?

SadisticFishing
2007-07-22, 09:10 PM
Physical attacks against you have a 50% miss chance, and the Blind-Fight feat doesn’t help opponents, since you’re ethereal and not merely invisible. If the attack is capable of striking ethereal creatures, the miss chance is only 20% (for concealment).

^ Here :P

Blind-fighting doesn't work, as you don't have concealment, you're ethereal.

Tor the Fallen
2007-07-22, 10:00 PM
Very nice Mann, I like it.


That's...cute.
Whoever said about that build being a nice trick was dead on.
A lot of those custom, "I'm Joe the Master Tripper, It's all I do!" builds don't interest me...They are so specific and can end up pigeon holeing a player. There is a chance you may just want to reach outside your "awesome" flamewhip attacks...even if psionics aren't casters for the sake of caster level reduction feats, doesn't help you that much.
A ring of blink does run out, the anti-psionic anti-magic stuff was mentioned, immunities...The success on these builds depends so much on your GM it's ridiculous. I can see the Flame Lasher being useful for his flame lash in the easiest to low end moderate encounters, if it's just generic rolled material.

You couldn't be more wrong. The weakness of melee classes is the fact that their only defense against enemies is a high fortitude save and a lot of HP. In many cases, they MUST dish out a lot of damage in order to break through the ranks of enemy fighters to put the hurt on the sorceror who is spamming dominate person on him. Unfortunately, all the HP in the world won't help a fighter against an airborne, invisible caster spamming save-or-die spells.

Because of this, melee classes must focus on doing one specific thing, and doing it well. Why? Because melee classes can only hit stuff, and if they can't hit stuff, they're going to die.

Ergo, if you want a successful melee character, you better be able to lay the hurt on thick and fast.

Mann's lasher, on the other hand, avoids many of the weaknesses of core melee because it's psionic. A psychic warrior/pyro/illithid slayer would be very, very powerful. At level 20, it's BAB would be near that of a fighter, and still have 18 manifester levels. Those manifester levels means all sorts of stuff- dimension door, healing, buffing, flying.

The lasher would serve as a phenomenal melee character, as he could be controlling the battle field with trip, as well as dealing huge amounts of damage. Additionally, he has versatility the fighter could only dream of, thanks to the manifester levels.

The only thing that would really put pause to this character would be fire resistant/immune creatures. That's when you whip out your alternate weapon; a greatsword, a ranseur, whatever. You still have a bunch of fighter feats, you can still be stabbing the holy hell out of everything. Except now you'll be doing it about as well as the party fighter.

Jack Mann
2007-07-22, 10:21 PM
Person_Man's lasher. I was just showing that it actually worked.

Tor the Fallen
2007-07-22, 10:24 PM
Person_Man's lasher. I was just showing that it actually worked.

:smalleek:

Oops. Sorry Person_Man. All these men with their underscores confused me.

Person_Man
2007-07-22, 10:27 PM
Re: Damage Dealing

A Fire Lash specifically acts like a whip for feats. Thus it can be used with Power Attack, and all other melee combat feats. According to the FAQ, you can use a whip two handed with Power Attack (and thus Leap Attack as well).

And that's before you consider any class abilities you might have that add damage. So clearly, hitting and killing isn't going to be a problem for this build.


Re: Transparency


Here are the transparency rules:



Combining Psionic And Magical Effects

The default rule for the interaction of psionics and magic is simple: Powers interact with spells and spells interact with powers in the same way a spell or normal spell-like ability interacts with another spell or spell-like ability. This is known as psionics-magic transparency.

Psionics-Magic Transparency

Though not explicitly called out in the spell descriptions or magic item descriptions, spells, spell-like abilities, and magic items that could potentially affect psionics do affect psionics.

When the rule about psionics-magic transparency is in effect, it has the following ramifications.

Spell resistance is effective against powers, using the same mechanics. Likewise, power resistance is effective against spells, using the same mechanics as spell resistance. If a creature has one kind of resistance, it is assumed to have the other. (The effects have similar ends despite having been brought about by different means.)

All spells that dispel magic have equal effect against powers of the same level using the same mechanics, and vice versa.

The spell detect magic detects powers, their number, and their strength and location within 3 rounds (though a Psicraft check is necessary to identify the discipline of the psionic aura).

Dead magic areas are also dead psionics areas.

Notice how there is nothing there that says psionic feats count as magical feats, or that caster levels count as manifest levels. This is very important, because it means I can't apply metamagic feats to my psionics, and vice verses. Nor can I take Radiant Servant of Pelor to progress my Psion manifester levels. Transparency is about how spells interact with psionic powers, not about feats or caster levels. And thus, the caster level penalties from the Mage Slayer feats don't apply to psionic manifester levels.

If for some reason you think it should be and want to make a house rule, this build can still be used quite effectively by any number of non-manifester class combos, with or without the Tome of Battle.

Re: Whether or not Blinking is Concealment

It doesn't matter. Pierce Magical Concealment clearly says that "You disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell-like abilities such as darkness, blur, invisibility, obscuring mist, ghostform, and spells when used to create concealment effects." Clearly, it is meant to disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell like effects, and then they just list off some of the things that do that, including things that don't count as concealment. Invisibility isn't concealment, its invisibility. Ghostform isn't concealment, it makes you incorporeal. And according to the Blink spell, "An ethereal creature is invisible, incorporeal, and capable of moving in any direction, even up or down." So Pierce Magical Concealment clearly disregards it.

And again, if for some reason you want to house rule otherwise, the build will just have to ask the arcane caster in the party to use Greater Invisibility, or you'll have to use the psionic power, Mass Cloud Mind.

Also, I think Tor perfectly describes why I like this build. It's been my personal experience that melee builds get really boring, really quickly. In order to survive any high-powered campaign, you insanely high hit points and a powerful damage combo. If you don't have both of those things, you will quickly be dead the first time your DM throws any full caster above CR 9ish at you. This build allows you to have the fun of hitting stuff, you can still play the meatshield role thanks to your huge reach and ability to prevent casters from casting defensively, and you can be as versatile as you want to be with your manifester or Tome of Battle abilities. It's can fill any role (except maybe party healer, unless you want to invest in Able Learner and UMD so you can use Wands), and it can do it well.

SadisticFishing
2007-07-22, 10:30 PM
Oh I'm sorry, I'm actually wrong -_-

But it wasn't from misunderstanding Blink, it was from not reading Pierce Magical Concealment better :P

I'm not sure it was meant to let you pierce your own magical concealment though -_- haha. Well played

Jack Mann
2007-07-22, 10:31 PM
Hey, I have no underscore. I'm just underlined, as are we all.

JackMage666
2007-07-22, 10:45 PM
Personally, I think it'd be pretty cheesy to use Power Attack with it, since you don't get to add your Str bonus to damage. It seems to be a psionic effect, not so much a weapon, so Power Attack shouldn't work. I think the whole "apply any feats that a standard whip" sentence thing is referring to weapon-specific feats like Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical, Melee Weapon Mastery, Weapon Supremacy, ect.
Yeah, you may be able to get it past a DM, but it's cheesy. Just a warning.
Now, sneak attack, skirmish, or anything like that is still good, since it is weapon-like anyway.

Also, the biggest problem is that it's energy damage - fire to be exact. Meaning, in higher level games, most monsters won't even be phased by it. Fire Immunity is common, so you'll have a tough time hurting most things. Even if you use the variants, you're still in trouble, since energy immunity/resistance its pretty common, especially with higher CRs.
If you're just fighting Humans, though, it can be pretty good.

Vortling
2007-07-22, 11:22 PM
Question about this build, could it work without the psionics and replace the need for touch attacks with the Master Thrower's (from Complete Warrior) Weak Spot special ability? Or perhaps thrown splash weapons?

Ulzgoroth
2007-07-22, 11:32 PM
As a flip side of the magic-psionics transparency limitations, am I correctly understanding that your anti-mage feats won't work against similar psionic defenses? Since you've brought in psionics it would be entirely reasonable to disrupt your murder machine that way.

All the same, ouch.

Dausuul
2007-07-22, 11:40 PM
This build allows you to have the fun of hitting stuff, you can still play the meatshield role thanks to your huge reach and ability to prevent casters from casting defensively...

Whips don't threaten (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#whip), and my reading of the flame lash power suggests that it doesn't threaten either, so you're not going to be able to stop casters from defensive casting with the whip.

On the other hand, there's no reason you couldn't pick up TWF and wield a sword in your off-hand. Then you could call this fighting style "Transdimensional Balor." :smallbiggrin:

Stephen_E
2007-07-23, 12:11 AM
Psi-magic transparency does not affect feats. Otherwise, practiced spellcaster would work on psionics, and there would be no need for practiced manifester. The psi-magic transparency section of the SRD is quite specific on what is and isn't affected.

Where are the Psi-magic transperancy rules in the SRD?
Thanks.

Stephen

Jack Mann
2007-07-23, 12:22 AM
Right here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicPowersOverview.htm#psionicsMagicTransparenc y).

Funkyodor
2007-07-23, 01:09 AM
So instead of blink, what if you used etherealness? You are saying that you would be able to smack people around in the prime matereal plane from the ethereal plane because you took an ability that lets you smack around ethereal creatures from the prime matereal? I agree that Blink is an ethereal effect like ghost form, but the concealment granted to your opponent via blink is the opposite. And I think that transparancy is supossed to counter abilities that the enemy has, not counter the side effects of your own ability. It states in the Blink spell how to counteract the 20% miss chance, you need a weapon that can effect the prime matereal from the ethereal.

CASTLEMIKE
2007-07-23, 01:54 AM
Very nice.

Wolfbite
2007-07-23, 02:32 AM
Very nice Mann, I like it.



You couldn't be more wrong. The weakness of melee classes is the fact that their only defense against enemies is a high fortitude save and a lot of HP. In many cases, they MUST dish out a lot of damage in order to break through the ranks of enemy fighters to put the hurt on the sorceror who is spamming dominate person on him. Unfortunately, all the HP in the world won't help a fighter against an airborne, invisible caster spamming save-or-die spells.

That's why you have a party of adventurers, and I am hoping to the gods, with diverse skills and classes for tackling problems....So it's not just your fighter being killed by a super caster.


Because of this, melee classes must focus on doing one specific thing, and doing it well. Why? Because melee classes can only hit stuff, and if they can't hit stuff, they're going to die.

Ergo, if you want a successful melee character, you better be able to lay the hurt on thick and fast.

I have yet to see a situation where being a multiclassed psi-whatever with a second rate BAB would be able to do this more effectively than another fighter variety class combination.


Mann's lasher, on the other hand, avoids many of the weaknesses of core melee because it's psionic. A psychic warrior/pyro/illithid slayer would be very, very powerful. At level 20, it's BAB would be near that of a fighter, and still have 18 manifester levels. Those manifester levels means all sorts of stuff- dimension door, healing, buffing, flying.

Oh those brain-eaters...so it's sounds like we're getting pretty specific what with the illithid fighting campaign...Game dependant much? I think that was an original point I was making.


The lasher would serve as a phenomenal melee character, as he could be controlling the battle field with trip, as well as dealing huge amounts of damage. Additionally, he has versatility the fighter could only dream of, thanks to the manifester levels.

Yes well, the fighter won't be able to always attack...especially if you have all these versitility plans for him. Sadly there is only so many actions you can take in a round. And any fighter that has to spend time doing things other than hitting and keeping the attention of the monster isn't an ideal frontliner.


The only thing that would really put pause to this character would be fire resistant/immune creatures. That's when you whip out your alternate weapon; a greatsword, a ranseur, whatever. You still have a bunch of fighter feats, you can still be stabbing the holy hell out of everything. Except now you'll be doing it about as well as the party fighter.

Ok so here you are no longer the main frontliner, and can do it "about as well" as the party fighter...even then it depends on the dice rolls.

First of all the fire lash whip only deals fire energy damage. An etheral whip sadly... It can do neat whip stuff! It can make ranged touch attacks...so aside from the fire energy damage, which is it's own effect, are you taking an additional -4 penalty from whip related factors to make the damage (aside from fire energy)lethal? Not to mention all the attacks of opportunity you could potentially provoke? And Power Attack...only works with melee attacks...not ranged touch attacks as the fire lash weapon is...so I don't think all that bonus damage happens...
and yes that is a ranged touch attack within and up to 15 feet away.

Secondly, the initial point of this was "an attack that hits 95% of the time". Coupled with a ring of blinking, this is not entirely true...since there is a 20% chance your attacks don't hit anyway. In addition I don't see why that 20% wouldn't apply to the power manifestations going off on the etheral plane accidently as well...even if it's not "spell casting".

Thirdly, the ring of blinking is not as reliable an item as it may seem. Sure it's a good item, but I think after a night of bad percentile rolls and you may not find it so agreeable. And opponents could easily render your ring useless...not to mention opponents who can target invisible and ethereal creatures.

Ultimately I find it's a cheese build that relies on dealing 1d8 fire damage (maybe +2d6 fire damage (if you can apply that fourth level pyro ability by making your fire whip even more fiery). Then "+massive bonus damage" from...sneak attacks, flatfooted challenge? And...no crit multiplyer except x2 off 1d8. So hopefully you're bypassing a creature's defenses (aside from size, dex and deflection), all while gambling with 20% to miss the target.

This build would be cute for a bit but a good GM could easily make things a lot more challenging. Especially if your party relies on you to fill some psionic support niche...Being good at potentially dealing huge damage off of your firewhip? Too specific to be overly useful.

Jack Mann
2007-07-23, 03:03 AM
The problem with the party idea is that at high levels, the fighter becomes little more than a baggage handler. At those levels, his party members are taking care of all the challenges, while he occasionally helps out a bit, or even stands on the sidelines, since getting involved often only means making him a threat to his own allies (against something with the ability to dominate, for example).

This build does more damage because you can almost always power attack for full. Fighters can't typically do this without having either a very high miss chance or a low AC (shock trooper). This build doesn't suffer that problem. At level twenty, on a charge, you're doing 1d8+60 damage. 1d8+40 on a regular attack. Granted, you can't make attacks of opportunity, but you can generally make a five foot step to avoid provoking attacks of opportunity.

The illithid slayer prestige class has a number of bonuses that are good even if you're not fighting illithids. Indeed, the SRD version even has much of the illithid flavor removed. You're specialized, but no more than the ranger. Sometimes, a ranger may not face his favored enemy either. That's all up to the DM.

The fact is, there's not much a fighter can do to keep a monster's attention either. If it's smart, it's going to go after the casters no matter what the fighter does, since the fighter typically just isn't a threat. The only way a fighter can protect the caster is, in fact, to eschew damage and simply concentrate on tripping and attacks of opportunity. This is the only place where the fighter is superior, since this build has no attacks of opportunity (vital for battlefield control).

The fire lash is not a ranged touch attack. It is like the whip. The whip, and I want you to understand this clearly, is not a ranged weapon. It acts in some ways as if it was, but it is still a melee weapon. You can power attack with it. The only difference between this and a regular whip is that this does fire damage and acts against touch AC. I understand your confusion. In 3.0, the whip was treated as a ranged weapon, but in 3.5, they realized how utterly idiotic that was and changed it.

You ignore your own blink miss chance thanks to pierce magical concealment. Ring of blinking creates a spell effect. You ignore those.

Yes, the ring of blinking isn't 100%. So? You can boost your AC other ways, just as a fighter can. The point is that a lot of attacks from them don't hit, and it doesn't hurt you at all. It's really just a nice bonus to your defenses.

And as has been said, in those fights where you can't hit with your fire lash, you can always pull out your back-up weapon. It's no different from the fighter pulling out his cold iron greatsword when going up against a demon. Sure, you're no longer all that and a can of beans, but you can still manifest powers to deliver a whoopin'. This is why psychic warriors are already superior to fighters, despite their average BAB and fewer feats.

Aquillion
2007-07-23, 03:29 AM
As a flip side of the magic-psionics transparency limitations, am I correctly understanding that your anti-mage feats won't work against similar psionic defenses? Since you've brought in psionics it would be entirely reasonable to disrupt your murder machine that way.Sorta. Plainly this:

Spellcasters you threaten may not cast defensively....does not prevent psionicists from manifesting defensively.

This (a key part of the combo) won't work on psionics, either:
You disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell-like abilities such as darkness, blur, invisibility, obscuring mist, ghostform, and spells when used to create concealment effects....since psionics are not "spells or spell-like abilities."

For the same reason, this won't work:
As a standard action you can make a melee attack that ignores any bonuses to Armor Class granted by spells (including potions and wands).

But this:

If you deal damage to your opponent, you also instantly and automatically dispel all that opponent's spells and spell effects that grant a bonus to Armor Class.
Is that the exact wording of the feat? As it's worded in the quote above, it probably won't work, either, but this one has a little wiggle room for debate under psionics-magic transparency, thanks to this bit from the rules on that:

All spells that dispel magic have equal effect against powers of the same level using the same mechanics, and vice versa.If it clarifies, anywhere, that "automatically dispel" means "as per the spell dispel magic", then it will at least manage to dispel defensive psionics under psionics-magic transparency (assuming you can land a hit through them.) Otherwise it probably it won't.

lord_khaine
2007-07-23, 04:48 AM
We have a separate feat to increase ML and one for CL. Manifesters can overchannel, casters cannot. ML is not the same as CL. It is not the only balancing factor of the feat that is only powerful under certain circumstances. They are different. Transparency does not make both systems entirely equal in every way.


gahh, did you actualy read what i wrote, im not talking about a transperarency here, im talking about that its very proberly they simply didnt think of psionics, when they designet this feat.

and what do you mean its not the only balancing factor? it is the only thing that balance this feat, that if casters want it they lose a quite a bit of mystical power.
and only powerfull under ceryain circumstances? yeah like just about any time a opponent you treaten tries to cast a spell defencively, how often do you think that comes up?


Notice how there is nothing there that says psionic feats count as magical feats, or that caster levels count as manifest levels. This is very important, because it means I can't apply metamagic feats to my psionics, and vice verses. Nor can I take Radiant Servant of Pelor to progress my Psion manifester levels. Transparency is about how spells interact with psionic powers, not about feats or caster levels. And thus, the caster level penalties from the Mage Slayer feats don't apply to psionic manifester levels.

If for some reason you think it should be and want to make a house rule, this build can still be used quite effectively by any number of non-manifester class combos, with or without the Tome of Battle

well when you feel bad about abusing a rules oversigt, then i really would recomend scrapping the mage slayer feat chain instead, being a full manifester gives you a lot more than the ability to prevent defensive casting, and you really dont need the rest of the feats to 95% of the time 90% of time.

ZeroNumerous
2007-07-23, 09:10 AM
Human Psion(Telepath) 6/Sonokineticist 1/Thrallherd 10/Psion 3.

Feats:
Human - Blindfight
1st - Power Attack
3rd - Leap Attack
6th - Pierce Magical Concealment('round when you get the Ring)
9th - Pierce Magical Protection
12 - [Filler]
15 - [Filler]
18 - [Filler]

17/20 Manifesting. Sound-based damage, therefore immunity means nothing. Only +9 on your BAB, but who cares? You can add +X to your attack roll through manifesting, and when you're trying to hit AC 10 then it doesn't matter what your BAB is.

EDIT: Oh, ya, about Thrallherd..

You have your Thrall take up the same series of Feats, except he picks up Leadership at 12th. Or maybe you take Draconic Leadership(or Undead Leadership) at 12th. Who knows, whatever, it's not important. What matters is that you now have 4 characters under your control. 1 at ECL 20, one at ECL 17, and two at ECL 15(or two at ECL 17 and one at ECL 15 if you took Undead/Draconic Leadership instead of your Thrall).

The ECL 17 should be a Sorcerer(or if you can get it, a rebalanced Wilder). Your ECL 15s should be pure Wizards. You are now your own party. The Batmen can easily occupy several enemies, your Sorcerer can back you up with Energy Substitued Sonic-attacks, and you can do whatever you feel like doing with the rest of this build..

Catch
2007-07-23, 09:23 AM
gahh, did you actualy read what i wrote, im not talking about a transperarency here, im talking about that its very proberly they simply didnt think of psionics, when they designet this feat.

And if it was an issue, there would be published errata to rectify that. At the most basic level, psionics and magic are not at all alike.

Magic has raw power, psionics have versatility. They're different animals that achieve similar feats in wholly different ways. If psionics were the same as magic, they would be called "magic." But they're not. Saying that the Mage Slayer feats should incur a ML penalty is the same as suggesting that a Martial Adept taking those feats should have an Initiator Level penalty.

They're just not the same, and you shouldn't treat them as such.

Person_Man
2007-07-23, 09:43 AM
As a flip side of the magic-psionics transparency limitations, am I correctly understanding that your anti-mage feats won't work against similar psionic defenses? Since you've brought in psionics it would be entirely reasonable to disrupt your murder machine that way.

All the same, ouch.

Yes. Transparancy prevents Enlarge Person from stacking with Expansion, but doesn't effect how you use feats. So the Mage Slayer feats won't effect psionic wielders, and the 95% Lasher's worst enemies will definitely be other psionic enemies. Though its important to note that he's still making Touch attacks that ignore Dex and Dodge bonuses against them, and he has whatever other abilities he gets from the rest of the build.

And as Dausuul correctly reminded us, whips don't threaten (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#whip), which is an important point that I had forgotten. So serious battlefield control is out, unless you pick up some other method of doing so. This build definitely needs to pick up Expansion, Claws of the Beast, Bite of the Wolf, Improved Unarmed Attack, or something similar specifically so that you do threaten the area around you.

Does anyone know a PrC or feat that allows a whip to threaten?

Vortling points out Master Thrower also uses touch attacks. This combo would work just as well with him, although its my opinion that a Master Thrower would have a harder time dealing damage, since you're not using a melee weapon. Sneak Attack would certainly work, but then you're vulnerable against undead/constructs/plants, and not just other psionic users.

Another much more convoluted option is to use a normal weapon, Deep Impact (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/psionicFeats.html#deep-impact), Psionic Meditation (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/psionicFeats.html#psionic-meditation), Hustle (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/hustle.htm). Using this combo, you can make one touch attack per turn with any weapon.

Or even if you don't use the touch attack part of the combo, I think Ring of Blinking + Pierce Magical Concealment by itself is a very worth combo for any non-caster melee build.

Zherog
2007-07-23, 10:21 AM
And as Dausuul correctly reminded us, whips don't threaten (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#whip), which is an important point that I had forgotten. So serious battlefield control is out, unless you pick up some other method of doing so. This build definitely needs to pick up Expansion, Claws of the Beast, Bite of the Wolf, Improved Unarmed Attack, or something similar specifically so that you do threaten the area around you.

If you are willing to use 3.0 material, you can grab one level of lasher from Sword and Fist. Of course, as I recall the pre-reqs for that PrC are built around the idea that the whip is a ranged weapon...

lord_khaine
2007-07-23, 10:23 AM
And if it was an issue, there would be published errata to rectify that. At the most basic level, psionics and magic are not at all alike.

Magic has raw power, psionics have versatility. They're different animals that achieve similar feats in wholly different ways. If psionics were the same as magic, they would be called "magic." But they're not. Saying that the Mage Slayer feats should incur a ML penalty is the same as suggesting that a Martial Adept taking those feats should have an Initiator Level penalty.

They're just not the same, and you shouldn't treat them as such

about a published psionic errata, did you know, that wizards still hasnt come with any official rule, about what happens if a psycrystal dies?
thats a serious question that affect most psions, and it has been around since EPH came out. when that problem hasnt been adressed, what do you think is the odds of wizards even notecing this one?

and no, caster lv and manifester lv is very much alike, its about equaly powerfull, you get it from the same things, and can raise it in much the same ways.
initiator lvs is something thats both less powerfull, and working on a much more different mechanic, where you fx get initiator lvs as a function of your lv, no matter what class you pick.

and person_man, i would think that arcane casters would be a bigger problem than psions, since the build doesnt do anything to help against the primary defence of arcane casters, not being within melee range.
psions on the other hand doesnt have as many fancy defences, for a start they dont have invisibility, the most basic and annoying defence a caster can pull out imo.

as for making touch attack, a much simpler solution would be to use arcane magic, and cast wraith strike.

Aquillion
2007-07-23, 01:53 PM
and what do you mean its not the only balancing factor? it is the only thing that balance this feat, that if casters want it they lose a quite a bit of mystical power.
and only powerfull under ceryain circumstances? yeah like just about any time a opponent you treaten tries to cast a spell defencively, how often do you think that comes up?You're overlooking several key factors. First introducing psionics to the game automatically makes this feat chain weaker. Suddenly, there are "casters" out there that it doesn't work on at all. Keep in mind that we're talking about spending three feats here, a substantial chunk of those available to a psiwar. It makes sense for the disadvantages to cost less when the feats themselves are going to be less useful.

Second, the CL loss is actually closer to a flavor thing than a balance thing, like Barbarians being unable to be lawful. Why is that? Because as it stands, no spellcaster in their right mind would ever take even one feat in this chain. The restriction would never affect anyone who would actually take it; it might as well just say "you cannot take this feat if you have the ability to cast spells, and cannot gain the ability to cast spells if you have this feat."

So, now that we have that established, the question is... is this feat broken when combined with casting? The question is absurd. It's a feat chain focused on melee combat, for crying out loud! How often does your mage threaten another caster with his staff or dagger or whatever? How often to reasonable circumstances come up where your full caster would be better off making a melee attack than casting a spell? Even if they attack through magical, are they actually going to do any meaningful damage?

This feat chain is usually garbage for a spellcaster anyway; the "disadvantages" you're talking of are nothing compared to the uselessness and wasted feats that these feats represent to them anyway. You don't see many mages taking power attack; you aren't going to see them take this, either. Therefore, the CL penalty was plainly intended as flavor, nothing else.

Even with this build, all that it is letting character do is play on nearly even ground with a full caster. It doesn't really make them as strong as a full caster; at the end of the day, the caster can still fly around invisibly, dispel people's defenses, then disintigrate them or something, while if this class tried similar tricks it'd be much weaker at doing them and would be wasting all those feats. But this gives them a definite and reliable way to contribute to the party... there is nothing overwhelmingly broken or abusive in this build, and to the extent that it does have issues, these don't have so much to do with the CL issue.

Person_Man
2007-07-23, 02:42 PM
Second, the CL loss is actually closer to a flavor thing than a balance thing, like Barbarians being unable to be lawful. Why is that? Because as it stands, no spellcaster in their right mind would ever take even one feat in this chain.


I would love a Duskblade or Cleric with this combo. It would be insanely powerful if done correctly. But clearly, it doesn't work because of the Mage Slayer feat penalties.


Using this combo is basically telling the DM, "Can we just skip to the part where you send spellcasters, psions, dragons, and pit fiends after us? Cause grinding through orcs is very boring for me." There are still tons encounters that will challenge and possibly kill you. But mundane melee combat just isn't one of them any more. The trick is that everyone else in your party has to be prepared for that as well. If they are, great. If not, put it away and use another build.

Prince_of_Blades
2007-07-23, 03:52 PM
What about Deflection and Sacred bonuses to AC? Also, the Exalted bonus from VoP is applicable against Touch attacks. Furthermore, there are several "alternate casting" systems that do not use spells or spell-like abilities. Any shadowcaster or binder can use abilities that grant miss chances. Even standard spellcasters can get the Shadow Veil reserve feat on the lasher to give him a miss chance, since it is a supernatural effect.

Clove
2007-07-23, 03:59 PM
The Feat is called "Pierce Magical Concealment".

It is not called "Overcome Magical Handicap of your own spell effect".


I wouldn't allow it.

According to the players handbook 3.5 it says in the blink spell, "Physical attacks against you have a 50% miss chance, and the Blind-Fight feat doesnt' help opponents, since you're ethereal and not merely invisible."

... you're ethereal and not merely invisible.

The spell states you blink randomly between the prime material plane and the ethereal plane.

Every other example for the pierce magical concealment feat involves invisibility, darkness, or some other illusion that masks reality. This blink spell, conversely, literally takes you out of the material plane.

The blink spell refers to "miss chances for concealment", but this is merely for understanding the end effect in most situations.

Add this to the idea of using a whip to threaten a 15 foot radius around your character and I have to recommend that if you want to put the work into creating a combat monster you should try to understand all the rules and not merely interpret them in whatever way suits your wants.

lord_khaine
2007-07-23, 04:15 PM
and the problem is, as it stands you dont even need to be a cleric or a duskblade to have fun with this feat, who can imagine the fun a Psywar could have with just the first part of the chain, that btw imo is more powerfull than the rest combined?

to tickle your imagination, think spiked chain, halfgiant and expansion, now you more or less have your own 20 feet radius where no arcane/divine caster will get a chance to drop a spell, or monster a chance to use a spelllike ability, without getting tripped and smashed.
and even more fun is, that around lv 8 the radius increases to 30 feet, thats pretty good for something as mobile as a psywar.

namo
2007-07-23, 05:21 PM
I really like how the OP spotted that by the RAW Pierce Magical Concealment lets you ignore the miss chance from your own Blink - pretty funny. But I don't see many DMs allowing it...

SadisticFishing
2007-07-23, 06:02 PM
The Feat is called "Pierce Magical Concealment".

It is not called "Overcome Magical Handicap of your own spell effect".


I wouldn't allow it.

According to the players handbook 3.5 it says in the blink spell, "Physical attacks against you have a 50% miss chance, and the Blind-Fight feat doesnt' help opponents, since you're ethereal and not merely invisible."

... you're ethereal and not merely invisible.

The spell states you blink randomly between the prime material plane and the ethereal plane.

Every other example for the pierce magical concealment feat involves invisibility, darkness, or some other illusion that masks reality. This blink spell, conversely, literally takes you out of the material plane.

The blink spell refers to "miss chances for concealment", but this is merely for understanding the end effect in most situations.

Add this to the idea of using a whip to threaten a 15 foot radius around your character and I have to recommend that if you want to put the work into creating a combat monster you should try to understand all the rules and not merely interpret them in whatever way suits your wants.

Thank you for explaining this better than I did.

On a side note, how do I put the Spoiler tag thingy?

Prince_of_Blades
2007-07-23, 07:47 PM
Master Thrower/Bloodstorm Blade could do this similarly well. It gains some advantages:

1.) You've got a larger area to attack into. With ranged weapon mastery, one range increment is 30', and you can attack up to 150' away with increasing penalties.

2.) You actually threaten the area around you, as you can use any melee weapon to throw, thanks to Throw Anything (Bloodstorm Blade 1).

3.) Master Thrower has got all kinds of nifty tricks for you to use. My personal favorites are Trip Shot and Palm Throw.

4.) Bloodstorm Blade allows you to treat attacks with thrown weapons as melee attacks for the rest of your turn.

However, you need some way of getting the weapons to come back to you. Returning Attacks only grants your weapon the returning property, and expends a use of an Iron Heart Strike. Go all the way to forth level, and the attacks will return on your action, without expending a maneuver.

[ spoiler ]This is how you do a spoiler, sans spaces. [ /spoiler ]

Zherog
2007-07-23, 08:26 PM
On a side note, how do I put the Spoiler tag thingy?

This is a spoiler

Will produce:

This is a spoiler

The Valiant Turtle
2007-07-23, 09:22 PM
This is intriguing. I will have to say that I fall into the group that would disallow power attack. Power attack only works for melee attacks. Fire lash specifies that it is a ranged attack. So I don't think the damage is adequate. I'll have to look into the thrower variants. I think I like those more.

Since it is a ranged attack, I'd consider be willing to consider most ranged attack feats.

TSGames
2007-07-23, 09:32 PM
This is intriguing. I will have to say that I fall into the group that would disallow power attack. Power attack only works for melee attacks. Fire lash specifies that it is a ranged attack. So I don't think the damage is adequate. I'll have to look into the thrower variants. I think I like those more.

Since it is a ranged attack, I'd consider be willing to consider most ranged attack feats.
I think this is a good example of why people should read at least the first page before posting in a thread. Is the fourth, fifth post saying this in this thread?

Fax Celestis
2007-07-23, 09:54 PM
This is intriguing. I will have to say that I fall into the group that would disallow power attack. Power attack only works for melee attacks. Fire lash specifies that it is a ranged attack. So I don't think the damage is adequate. I'll have to look into the thrower variants. I think I like those more.

Since it is a ranged attack, I'd consider be willing to consider most ranged attack feats.

Fire Lash specifies that it works with all feats that apply to whips. Power Attack works with whips. Therefore: Fire Lash works with Power Attack.

0oo0
2007-07-23, 10:39 PM
The Feat is called "Pierce Magical Concealment".

It is not called "Overcome Magical Handicap of your own spell effect".


I wouldn't allow it.

According to the players handbook 3.5 it says in the blink spell, "Physical attacks against you have a 50% miss chance, and the Blind-Fight feat doesnt' help opponents, since you're ethereal and not merely invisible."

... you're ethereal and not merely invisible.

The spell states you blink randomly between the prime material plane and the ethereal plane.

Every other example for the pierce magical concealment feat involves invisibility, darkness, or some other illusion that masks reality. This blink spell, conversely, literally takes you out of the material plane.

The blink spell refers to "miss chances for concealment", but this is merely for understanding the end effect in most situations.


Doesn't

e: Whether or not Blinking is Concealment

It doesn't matter. Pierce Magical Concealment clearly says that "You disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell-like abilities such as darkness, blur, invisibility, obscuring mist, ghostform, and spells when used to create concealment effects." Clearly, it is meant to disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell like effects, and then they just list off some of the things that do that, including things that don't count as concealment. Invisibility isn't concealment, its invisibility. Ghostform isn't concealment, it makes you incorporeal. And according to the Blink spell, "An ethereal creature is invisible, incorporeal, and capable of moving in any direction, even up or down." So Pierce Magical Concealment clearly disregards it.

And again, if for some reason you want to house rule otherwise, the build will just have to ask the arcane caster in the party to use Greater Invisibility, or you'll have to use the psionic power, Mass Cloud Mind.
Counter your statement about the feat? It sounds as if both interpretations are contradictory, which is true?

Person_Man
2007-07-24, 09:09 AM
Well, people are free to house rule whatever they want.

Re: Power Attack (again)

But as Fax pointed out, the Fire Lash description specifically says that it can be used with feats that work with whips, and whips work with Power Attack. If you choose not to because it doesn't mesh with your concept of physics, then you're killing Catgirls. Or you're limiting it because you think the combo is too powerful - and if you think that's true, you obviously don't play with optimized full spellcasters very often.

Re: Blink (again)

Pierce Magical Concealment allows you to ignore the miss chance from any magical effect. Any miss chance. It doesn't limit the source of the miss chance. If that wording isn't powerful strong enough for you, the feat then specifically gives the examples of Invisibly and Ghostform (an 8th level spell that makes its caster incorporeal). A Ring of Blinking makes you blink in and out of being ethereal. Etherealess is defined as being Invisible and Incorporeal. So again, the text of the feat specifically allows you to pull this combo off. If you want to ban that because of catgirls or the power level of your campaign, you're free to do so. But the RAW clearly allows it.


Re: Thrower/Bloodstorm Blade

Combine with a Harpoons (Frostburn), which can be used as a melee weapon or a thrown weapon and it does the same damage going in as it does coming out of the target. Throw in the Returning enchantment, and you're set. The only problem is when they come back to you, you need a free hand to catch it or it drops to the ground. Thri-kreen for more arms? Just might be worth the LA in this case.

Blue Paladin
2007-07-24, 10:17 AM
Pierce Magical Concealment allows you to ignore the miss chance from any magical effect. Any miss chance. It doesn't limit the source of the miss chance. If that wording isn't powerful strong enough for you, the feat then specifically gives the examples of Invisibly and Ghostform (an 8th level spell that makes its caster incorporeal).Just wondering if you could reconcile something to my satisfaction: how do you rule in the case of being struck by a Clinging Shadow Strike (a Shadow Hand maneuver)? It's a supernatural ability (i.e. not a spell, spell-like, or magical effect; source does matter) that gives the target struck a 20% miss chance. Does Pierce Magical Concealment work against it?

If yes, how? Clearly this is a case outside the conditions outlined in the feat.

If no, why? All it does is create swirling darkness, the spell version of which is ignored entirely via that feat.

The Valiant Turtle
2007-07-24, 10:54 AM
Power attack doesn't care about what weapon you are (or aren't) using. It's a feat that works with any melee attack. You can use your longbow to bash an enemy over the head as an improvised weapon and use power attack because it's a melee attack, but that doesn't mean that power attack works with longbows. Alternately, you can't use power attack with your Two-Handed sword if you choose to throw it because that would be a ranged attack. And of course you can't use power attack if you choose to throw your whip (maybe a red dragon is hovering 20' above you and you've got a dragon slaying frost whip), because it's a ranged attack.

Fire lash specifies that it is a ranged attack, which means it subject to an entire different set of bonuses and penalties than melee attacks (including the penalty for firing into melee if you don't have precise shot). Its rather weird that they defined it as a ranged attack instead of the way a regular whip attack is defined, but since they did it has to be used as such. Personally I would be fine with house-ruling it to work as a touch-attack whip--but that would be a house rule, not RAW.

The Bloodstorm Blade from ToB can power attack with thrown attacks, and I'd probably let him do it with a fire lash if he really wanted to, just because it's fun (I'd just boost the fire damage though). If it's a route a Pyro really wanted to go I'd probably even let him trade in some other class ability later on for something that acts like Power Attack.

Prince_of_Blades
2007-07-24, 11:24 AM
With Master Thrower, you might even be able to skimp out on the ring of blinking. With Sneaky Shot, you can use Sleight of Hand to deny them their Dex bonus against that attack as a move action, then use the Ranged Pin feat to have them considered grappled (thus denying them their Dex bonus on other attacks) until they succeed on a Strength or Escape Artist check. Of course, its not a difficult check.

Aquillion
2007-07-24, 11:42 AM
Well, people are free to house rule whatever they want.

Re: Power Attack (again)

But as Fax as pointed out, the Fire Lash description specifically says that it can be used with feats that work with whips, and whips work with Power Attack. If you choose not to do so because you don't apply your Str bonus to touch attack and it therefore doesn't mesh with your concept of physics, then you're killing Catgirls. Or you're limiting it because you think the combo is too powerful - and if you think that's true, you obviously don't play with optimized full spellcasters very often.You're not reading it closely enough:


A pyro can take Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization (if she otherwise meets the prerequisites) in conjunction with the fire lash, as well as any feats that apply to the use of a standard whipFire lash only lets you take feats that can be used with a whip. It does not actually change what they do when you use them; per RAW, the only time that sentence matters is when you are selecting feats, not when you are using them.

So, Power Attack reads:
On your action, before making attack rolls for a round, you may choose to subtract a number from all melee attack rolls and add the same number to all melee damage rollsUnfortunately, fire lash does not make a melee damage roll. Where, exactly, is the sentence in its text that you think would change this? Being able to "take... any feats that apply to the use of a standard whip" does not mean "you can do absolutely anything feat-related with a fire lash that you could do with a standard whip"; it means you can take whip-specific feats. Sure, you could use this take Power Attack, but since the wording in question doesn't change anything else about the feat and doesn't give you the automatic ability to use the feat no matter what other issues arise from its text, Power Attack will still only apply to melee damage rolls you make with your fire whip.

selfcritical
2007-07-24, 11:43 AM
And if it was an issue, there would be published errata to rectify that. At the most basic level, psionics and magic are not at all alike.

Magic has raw power, psionics have versatility. They're different animals that achieve similar feats in wholly different ways. If psionics were the same as magic, they would be called "magic." But they're not. Saying that the Mage Slayer feats should incur a ML penalty is the same as suggesting that a Martial Adept taking those feats should have an Initiator Level penalty.

They're just not the same, and you shouldn't treat them as such.

The entire design philopshy of psionics disagrees with you. Translations of magical to psionic feats always treat manifesting levels and casting levels as equally valuable. Psionics is an alternative magic system, and you should always treat it as such if you want the impact on balance to not be goofy.

Person_Man
2007-07-24, 11:49 AM
Just wondering if you could reconcile something to my satisfaction: how do you rule in the case of being struck by a Clinging Shadow Strike (a Shadow Hand maneuver)? It's a supernatural ability (i.e. not a spell, spell-like, or magical effect; source does matter) that gives the target struck a 20% miss chance. Does Pierce Magical Concealment work against it?

If yes, how? Clearly this is a case outside the conditions outlined in the feat.

If no, why? All it does is create swirling darkness, the spell version of which is ignored entirely via that feat.

Pierce Magical Concealment has no effect on Clinging Shadow Strike, because Clinging Shadow Strike is not a spell or spell-like ability.

That's just how the feat is written. There is no why. You're trying to apply real world logic to D&D. Logic does not apply to D&D. For example, how come Evasion can be used when a Fireball blows up in a 5 ft square room with no cover? How can a Wizard cast Lightning Bolt while standing in three feet of water against an enemy 5 feet away standing in the same pool of water without taking any electrical damage himself? How come my mount cannot attempt an Overrun when I make a Charge attack?

That's simply the way the rules are written. DMs are free to change them, and I'm fine with that. But then the argument is about whether or not the rules suck, as opposed to whether or not the combo I've laid out works.



Stuff disagreeing with me about the Fire Lash


The official FAQ (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a) specifically addresses this, using the exact argument Fax and I cited. If you don't believe me, read the FAQ pages 52-53.



Can you use a whip with two hands, thus gaining 1.5 x Strength bonus?

Given that the whip is a one-handed weapon, while it may appear awkward, the rules of the game are clear that this is certainly possible.


Can you use the Power Attack feat in combination with a whip?

Actually yes, this is also possible, since the whip is listed as a melee weapon.


Because the Pyrokineticist’s Fire Lash creates a whip of fire that requires only a touch attack, can you apply a Str bonus to the damage? Can you power attack with this special weapon?

It would seem so. The wording in the description of this psi-like ability indicates that you can take advantage of any feat that would apply to the use of a standard whip. Since one of those feats is Power Attack, then by reason, you must be able to apply your Strength bonus to the damage of a fire lash as well.


So, does anyone want to argue that the official rules clarification is wrong about the rules they wrote?

Telonius
2007-07-24, 11:59 AM
Incorrect. According to what you yourself quoted:



Power attack applies to standard whip use.

Huh, that's odd, I never noticed that little wrinkle. So you could conceivably use both Weapon Finesse and Power Attack at once on a rapier, whip, or spiked chain? :smallconfused:

Jack Mann
2007-07-24, 12:02 PM
Huh, that's odd, I never noticed that little wrinkle. So you could conceivably use both Weapon Finesse and Power Attack at once on a rapier, whip, or spiked chain? :smallconfused:

Yep. Generally not that great an idea, though. If you're a power attack build, you're probably damage focused, and you'll want a high strength.

Jasdoif
2007-07-24, 12:53 PM
As a point of interest, you don't need to be a manifester to take Pyrokineticist. All you need is a power point reserve, chaotic alignment, flavor prereq and some skills. Two ranks of Knowledge (psionics) can easily be met cross-class if need be, and martial adepts (among other non-casting and non-manifesting classes) get Concentration as a class skill.

So whether transparency applies or not isn't particularly pivotal, here.

Telonius
2007-07-24, 01:26 PM
Yep. Generally not that great an idea, though. If you're a power attack build, you're probably damage focused, and you'll want a high strength.

True enough. I'm imaginging a Fighter with an Archer build, but Finesse and Power Attack plus a rapier (wielded two-handed) to give him some extra options if something closes. Could be interesting.

Fax Celestis
2007-07-24, 01:28 PM
True enough. I'm imaginging a Fighter with an Archer build, but Finesse and Power Attack plus a rapier (wielded two-handed) to give him some extra options if something closes. Could be interesting.

Rapier specifically states in its description that it cannot be wielded in two hands. Otherwise, yeah. Neat.

However, a feycraft longsword can be finessed and wielded with two hands.

Rejakor
2007-07-24, 01:39 PM
Just read the thread, thought i'd pop in and say nice work! I've always thought pyrokineticist was a cool class, been thinking of playing one for a while. This build is great, I love it when I see fighter and rogue builds that actually keep up with casters.

Also, just to clarify, you could use the Weapon Afire psilike ability to make your lash do an extra 2d6 and then an extra 4d6, correct?

Collin152
2007-07-24, 03:26 PM
Rapier specifically states in its description that it cannot be wielded in two hands. Otherwise, yeah. Neat.

However, a feycraft longsword can be finessed and wielded with two hands.

Rather, that you gain no benefit for doing so.

Telonius
2007-07-24, 03:39 PM
Rather, that you gain no benefit for doing so.

Actually, here's the text.

You can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with a rapier sized for you, even though it isn’t a light weapon for you. You can’t wield a rapier in two hands in order to apply 1½ times your Strength bonus to damage.

As opposed to the Power Attack text:

If you attack with a two-handed weapon, or with a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands, instead add twice the number subtracted from your attack rolls.

So while wielding it two-handed doesn't get you the extra "Add 1.5 times strength bonus" to damage, it does get you the "Add twice the number you subtracted from your attack roll" to damage. Which is pretty darn weird, but there you go.

TSGames
2007-07-25, 01:50 AM
I just realized that "Pierce Magical Concealment" has "Blind Fight" as a prerequisite. In addition, Mage Slayer, has a BAB prerequisite of +3. This doesn't mean much, it does mean that one will need levels of a full BAB class to pull it off by tenth level, or you will need to be a PsyWarrior. In the case of the latter though, the lower BAB seems to limit the damage that you can get out of power attacking since you can only PA up to your BAB. It seems to me that Warblade would be an equal choice to PsyWarrior, though I don't think I'd call it better.


My grammar organ are died.

Draz74
2007-07-25, 02:14 AM
So, does anyone want to argue that the official rules clarification is wrong about the rules they wrote?

Wouldn't be the first time, now, would it? :smalltongue:

... not that I particularly think there's a reason to object to their ruling in this case.

Callix
2007-07-25, 04:24 AM
Why are the people who complain about Mage Slayer not reducing manifester level not annoyed about the Antipsionic Magic, Hostile Mind and Psionic Hole feats? All these "anti-psion" feats are in some ways equivalent to the Mage Slayer tree. The only difference is that you can't use anti-psionic feats if you have a pp reserve, while Mage Slayer can be taken by a caster. It's just stupid. Except in the case when, in an attempt to munchkin, you point out that a Wiz1/Ftr3 can cast True Strike at a caster level of -3, and that means you can create a use-activated Sword of True Strike for negative GP and XP... and time. That's right. You gain one day per 500 gp gathered in the creation process. And your sword has a permanent +20 to hit. :smallwink:

lord_khaine
2007-07-25, 04:53 AM
if you by "the people" means me, and by complains means pointing out something thats proberly a mistake in the rules, due to wizard usualy not considdering whats written in other books, when the make a new one.

then has you actualy taken a look at those feat?
they are pretty useless, and the no pp restriction would in that case be more of a flavor thing.

didnt quite get the last part, just hope you do know casting true strike requires a minimum caster lv of 1.

Saph
2007-07-25, 06:44 AM
But as Fax as pointed out, the Fire Lash description specifically says that it can be used with feats that work with whips, and whips work with Power Attack. If you choose not to because it doesn't mesh with your concept of physics, then you're killing Catgirls. Or you're limiting it because you think the combo is too powerful - and if you think that's true, you obviously don't play with optimized full spellcasters very often.

Person, saying "This is balanced because it's less powerful than an optimised full spellcaster" is like saying "This weapon's safe to keep around your kids because it's less powerful than an armed nuclear bomb". ;)

That said, it's a fun combo. But I don't think it'd be good to use in a game, because it's one of those all-or-nothing builds - either your target's vulnerable to fire damage and melee-attackable (in which case you completely annihilate it), or it's not (in which case you're completely useless). It'd be quite difficult for a DM to find opponents that aren't going to make you look either godly or ineffective.

- Saph

The Glyphstone
2007-07-25, 09:41 AM
Except in the case when, in an attempt to munchkin, you point out that a Wiz1/Ftr3 can cast True Strike at a caster level of -3, and that means you can create a use-activated Sword of True Strike for negative GP and XP... and time. That's right. You gain one day per 500 gp gathered in the creation process. And your sword has a permanent +20 to hit. :smallwink:


There has GOT to be some rule that disallows this...but it still made me choke on my food.:smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin: :smallbiggrin: Infinite wealth, XP, and time travel all at once...

Arbitrarity
2007-07-25, 09:43 AM
There is: Level one spells require caster level one to cast, and so can't be cast at caster level -3.

Can you negate mage slayer with Practiced spellcaster?

Person_Man
2007-07-25, 09:54 AM
Person, saying "This is balanced because it's less powerful than an optimised full spellcaster" is like saying "This weapon's safe to keep around your kids because it's less powerful than an armed nuclear bomb". ;)

Agreed. Clearly, this is for a high powered game or BBEG.



That said, it's a fun combo. But I don't think it'd be good to use in a game, because it's one of those all-or-nothing builds - either your target's vulnerable to fire damage and melee-attackable (in which case you completely annihilate it), or it's not (in which case you're completely useless).

I would disagree on this point.

If you're worried about fire immunity, use the sonic variant from the link I posted.

If you're worried about an enemy that's not attackable in melee or somehow (though you'll clearly own most spell casters) or immune to sonic (I'm sure there's something in MMIII or IV), then diversify. Being able to to hit 95% of the time in melee means that you can spend your other 19 class levels and everything beyond the four feats you need on other combos. For example, Psion 9/Pyro 1/Slayer 10. All you need is three or four powers to buff your whip, and the rest of your build can be spent figuring out how to thwart other enemies with your wide array of abilities.



It'd be quite difficult for a DM to find opponents that aren't going to make you look either godly or ineffective.

I concede that it would be hard to DM with this PC in the party.

I think the solution is that, Everyone in the party must be powerful, and there have to be a large number of enemies to fight in a single game day. It would be a lot like DMing a gestalt game. You can still be defeated, but everyone is fighting on a much higher level.

Bauglir
2008-02-07, 07:39 PM
Level one spells require caster level one to cast, and so can't be cast at caster level -3.

Huh. You know, I hadn't quite realized the implications of the "caster level must still be high enough to cast the spell in question" bit. Spellcasters who take this feat lose access to their two highest spell levels, in addition to the other effects of the caster level loss. I think.

Tengu
2008-02-07, 07:52 PM
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/7/7c/200px-Endor.jpg

In case you cannot read the small text at the bottom of the picture, it says:
Thread Necromancy

Voyager_I
2008-02-07, 10:03 PM
Besides, we all know that letting Emperor Tippy and Person Man read splatbooks (or core) is like keeping your bull in a china shop.

Person_Man
2008-02-07, 10:49 PM
Besides, we all know that letting Emperor Tippy and Person Man read splatbooks (or core) is like keeping your bull in a china shop.

I'm oddly nimble (http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2007/bull-in-china-shop-p1.php)?

Also, as Tengu correctly pointed out, thread Necromancy. People might want to take the debate back to the current thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71747).

Voyager_I
2008-02-07, 10:57 PM
My life seems oddly devoid of meaning after seeing that.

Idea Man
2008-02-07, 11:40 PM
I loved the Mythbusters bull-in-a-china-shop episode. :smallbiggrin:

I think the problem with using power attack on a whip is, mainly, it cannot cut armored targets, which is anything with armor bonus +1 or natural armor +3. How can something so easily thwarted be beefed up so much and not cut metal? Come to think of it, can a flame whip hurt an armored target at all?

Of course it can, I'm just kidding. It is a "lash of flame", not a true whip. It just has whip perks.

Jack Zander
2008-02-07, 11:46 PM
Cheese and Rice! Please stop posting here Threadomancers.