Dreamscarred Press - Path of War Expanded! (Thread VII)

[angelpalm]

Yep having dual stances is powerful, which is why I said to limit it to first level stances. Idk, figure it out lol. Surely there is some way it can be implemented to were it can be fair.

Not really feeling that fools errand at all, feel like a dm would look at that and just be like "naw, not trying to figure out how to make that entirely new mechanic work against my baddies bro". Not to mention that it is all over the place.

That brawler archetype would be nice if it didn't keep all of the brawlers most useless class features that nobody ever wanted lol. Can we pretty please get an archetype that gets rid of knockout and awesome blow lol.

As far as the fate/stay night stuff, basically it's just about giving the eidilon the ability to use maneuvers and such, probably at the expense of stuff like being able to use summon monster as a sla. Thinking implemented in a way similar to the aegis but make it a lot less flexible. Maybe even a separate archetype that reverses your position and makes you the initiator and your eidilon the caster?.

[Ninjaxenomorph]

Well, you are a supremely lazy player if you expect the GM to do the work figuring out the Lock condition. The burden is on the player; it would be like a wizard casting color spray and making the GM figure out the DC and what the effects are on the monsters. A GM would far more likely ban the discipline because of how ball-to-the-wall crazy it can get.

[ATalsen]

Well, you are a supremely lazy player if you expect the GM to do the work figuring out the Lock condition.

To be fair, a DM really does have to know what capabilities a player's PC brings to the table, in order to properly design encounters for the PC and their group.

Path of War mechanics in general change the flow of the game, even when both the DM and player know how things are supposed to work; throwing in a sub-system or mechanic (whichever you want to refer to lock and its associated aspects as) that’s totally brand new can add a lot of work to a DM’s load.

[neversterling]

Yep having dual stances is powerful, which is why I said to limit it to first level stances. Idk, figure it out lol. Surely there is some way it can be implemented to were it can be fair.

Maybe if the stance functioned only as IL 1, but even then, this hypothetical feat is worth at least twice as much as most passive benefit feats.

Creating a feat that is an auto-include in practically any build is generally bad game design.

Like Black Lotus in Vintage format./MtG

That brawler archetype would be nice if it didn't keep all of the brawlers most useless class features that nobody ever wanted lol. Can we pretty please get an archetype that gets rid of knockout and awesome blow lol.

The Contender archetype does get rid of those. And it keeps Martial Flexibility(the MOST interesting class feature), even making it more flexible.

[angelpalm]

Well, you are a supremely lazy player if you expect the GM to do the work figuring out the Lock condition. The burden is on the player; it would be like a wizard casting color spray and making the GM figure out the DC and what the effects are on the monsters. A GM would far more likely ban the discipline because of how ball-to-the-wall crazy it can get.

What are you even saying?



The dm needs to know how this completely brand new condition affects his creatures, why would that be on the player. How would the player even know? The only thing the player can do is assume he knows how it works in relation to his character and their stats, like your "Supremely" bad color spray example. The player doesn't necessarily know if his color spray will even work on the critters he uses it on. For all that player knows the creatures have one more hd than is allowed by that spell due to whatever reasons. And nor should they. It's up to the dm to know if their color spray will work or not and they can only know this from being familiar with the material. If the dm decides that he doesn't want to add more to his plate, especially a brand new condition with a literal WHOLE discipline devoted to it, then that is on them.

It has zero to do with the player, lol.


@ATalsen

Indeed, most people don't even know how to deal with grapple. Now you have some random condition that from what I can tell lets you drag creatures "regardless of your relative sizes or location" and doesn't explain how it interacts with the vast list of random creatures with multiple limbs and what not. It has them using reflex saves OR will saves instead cmd, and it lets them in certain situation uses strength for their reflex save lol......yeah it's just all so simple. If I showed your average dm the link to that whole discipline and told them I wanted to use that they would probably do this.



That being said I did see another discipline on the dreamscarred press that is actually grapple focused that might be promising. Will have to keep tabs on that one.



@neversterling

Every archer needs point blank shot and precise shot, so I really don't see how that is a bad thing. Like I said give it prerequisites that make it feasible and fair. But yeah in regards to contender your right, sometimes it's easy to skip that stuff in their text. I still have trouble finding things in path of war expanded with the layout.

[shawshank]

Probability Twist Question:
Riven Hourglass immediate action(counter)

"You can initiate this counter to reroll any one d20 roll or damage roll you make in combat on your turn."

This wording suggests you can only use the reroll during your turn. This would mean you would not be able to use a swift(boost) during the turn if you used this. Was that the intention? If so, it is certainly unique in being the only counter I am aware of that can only be used during your turn.

If the wording were changed to "You can initiate this counter to reroll any one d20 roll, or reroll any damage roll you make in combat on your turn."

This would allow it be used when counters are normally used as well as an additional benefit during your turn.

Thanks for any help I can get on this.

[Ninjaxenomorph]

So, if I cast color spray, the GM is the one that needs to look up or memorize the spell, and figure it out for himself who gets what conditions?

I don't know how it works in your games, but in games I have played in, generally the order of operations goes as thus: player casts spell. GM asks for DC, then rolls appropriate saves (unless the character screwed up and cast it on an immune creature). Player rolls results, and tells GM what happens to the hapless opponents that failed their save. If the player doesn't know their HD (which they might, either from prior results, knowledge skills, or just general out-of-game knowledge, like if you're first-level and fighting a handful of goblins or orcs, odds are they only have one or two HD), he tends to rattle off the results until nobody is affected.

If I were to bring a Fool's Errand utilizing Lock to a table, after informing the GM what I could do, it would probably play out the same way. Initiator does a lock attempt, GM does the opponent's saving throw. If they fail, player tells GM that they've locked the opponent, what that means for the opponent, and how to attempt to escape. GM does with that what he wishes.

That's what I mean when I say that the burden is on the player. If they want to introduce material, they have to explain it to the GM. If the GM doesn't like the implications of, say, a halfling warlord snagging his monsters, he can rule as he wants. I don't give two hoots about psionics. As long as the player explained what the things about the system were, I'd probably be inclined to allow stuff from it. Doesn't mean I have to know it inside and out. I tend to trust my players that they are getting it right, just as they trust me that I am getting things right. If either of us spot a mistake, I'd be disappointing if the other didn't point it out.

[Milo v3]

I'd personally be happy about a player bringing Fool's Errand to me (if I didn't already know it existed of course), a lot less headache inducing than trying to remember grappling rules and size rules.

[Labelos]

Hi, I recently started a game as a POW medic, and it's very fun so far. I was reading the other thread, the one about discipline for archetypes, and the original poster said that you can use your maneuvers at will outside of combat, as they refresh every round when you are not fighting. I was under the impression that you can't use your maneuvers outside of an encounter.

It strongly affects some abilities, such as the medic's triage (unlimited healing out of combat), or Riven Hourglass' probability twist (reroll on every out of combat roll).

How would you guys rule it?

[neversterling]

Hi, I recently started a game as a POW medic, and it's very fun so far. I was reading the other thread, the one about discipline for archetypes, and the original poster said that you can use your maneuvers at will outside of combat, as they refresh every round when you are not fighting. I was under the impression that you can't use your maneuvers outside of an encounter.

It strongly affects some abilities, such as the medic's triage (unlimited healing out of combat), or Riven Hourglass' probability twist (reroll on every out of combat roll).

How would you guys rule it?

Probability Twist states "in combat on your turn.", so no out of combat rerolls there.

Triage is encounter-dependent, so if you haven't rolled initiative or been in combat for a minute, you can't use it.

Read Path of War's system and use section for all the deets on what defines "encounter".

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/path-of-war/systems-and-use

In regards to initiating other utility maneuvers like Leaping Dragon and Ghost Step out of combat, there's nothing stopping you.

[Nyaa]

I'm few years late to the party, but 'martial power' is both level 6 psywar class feature and a feat from PoW1.

[Lord_Gareth]

That being said I did see another discipline on the dreamscarred press that is actually grapple focused that might be promising. Will have to keep tabs on that one.

Do you mean this: by Bladesman?

Because I'm gonna break your heart, buddy: he's not with us. He's a fan with a habit of making submissions. Thus far, the team has not had an interest in those submissions, and this case hasn't changed it.

There is no grapple discipline from us. There will be no grapple discipline from us. I can only suggest you make peace with that.

[upho]

If the dm decides that he doesn't want to add more to his plate, especially a brand new condition with a literal WHOLE discipline devoted to it, then that is on them.

Seems you've barely skimmed through the Fool's Errand document, because IMO and IME (after having playtested only two FE-based builds in only seven encounters), I'd say:

1. The lock mechanics are probably among the easiest in the game to handle and remember, being just slightly more complicated than say the mechanics for taking a 5-foot step.
2. Fool's Errand is not even remotely close to being "a literal WHOLE discipline devoted to" lock. More than half of the maneuvers have nothing more to do with lock than any similar maneuvers of any other discipline have.

Indeed, most people don't even know how to deal with grapple.

Maybe that's because grapple has some of the most complicated and rules fuzzy/lacking mechanics in the game, in very sharp contrast to those of lock? I mean, one of the very reasons lock was created in the first place was because of a wish for using some minor related mechanics while avoiding the overly complicated mess that is the grapple rules.

Now you have some random condition that from what I can tell lets you drag creatures "regardless of your relative sizes or location" and doesn't explain how it interacts with the vast list of random creatures with multiple limbs and what not.

Again, I recommend you actually read the document before making assumptions, because it makes it very clear that:

1. Lock is not "some random condition". It is a very simple condition with unusually clearly defined mechanics, easier to remember and to use than virtually all other conditions.
2. Lock does not interact with "multiple limbs and what not". At all. Lock interacts with the elements the rules for lock states it interacts with. Full stop. The limited interactions also happens to be one of the key reasons as to why lock is so easy to use and remember (although there are a few corner case interactions which need specific rulings, and these are thankfully currently being developed). Any other interaction you read into it just isn't there and is effectively a house rule.

And what is wrong with dragging creatures "regardless of your relative sizes or location"? Seems to be yet another factor that makes lock easier to use than most other similar mechanics. Which would be an argument for your DM including Fool's Errand.

It has them using reflex saves OR will saves instead cmd, and it lets them in certain situation uses strength for their reflex save lol......yeah it's just all so simple.

And again, please read the document:

1. Using anything other than Reflex saves is just a suggestion in case an individual somehow finds reflex saves challenges his/her personal take on "PF verisimilitude" or ability to come up with a fitting in-game description for using Reflex. RAW, lock doesn't require any other save than Reflex.
2. Yes, it lets locked creatures add Str instead of Dex to their Reflex save when attempting to get free. Not a particularly situational or complicated rule to remember or use IMO.

So yeah, it all really is so simple!

If I showed your average dm the link to that whole discipline and told them I wanted to use that they would probably do this.

Do what? Tell you "no, that would be too complicated for me, I won't allow it"? In that case, I think "your average dm" is a lot more easily intimidated by new mechanics than what I believe "your average DM who uses PoW" to be, considering the very mechanics-heavy nature of maneuvers.

That being said I did see another discipline on the dreamscarred press that is actually grapple focused that might be promising. Will have to keep tabs on that one.

If it's the one from just a couple a weeks ago, I have to say I unfortunately don't share your optimism, and I think I understand why the PoW team wasn't particularly impressed. And also why they won't make a discipline focused on grapple, for that matter.

[Kurald Galain]

All right, now that this is published I'm checking if there's any content I should recommend in my Magus guide (which sounds like a decent candidate to pick up some maneuvers via feats).

Minor detail: the Seize the Opportunity feat states that you can use disarm in place of an attack of opportunity. However, you can already do that without the feat (this is not the case for all special attacks, but it is for disarm and trip).

[Ninjaxenomorph]

I've stated my piece on Cursed Razor and the magus before, but Elemental Flux could be interesting. Limits weapons, but it's extra blasting and some good utility stuff. However, I think Shattered Mirror is a really cool discipline for a magus to pick up. All of these would be based off intelligence, with the martial training feats. A dip in Harbinger be useful. I'm actually going to have my character (aforementioned curse magus) in an upcoming game retrain a feat to take Hone Weapon. Since I'm maxing out Kno (Martial) anyway, it seems like a good way to add a bit of normal damage to everyone in the party that uses manufactured weapons.

Edit: some damage math: assuming you have a 16 strength by level 4, I would be dealing 1d6+8 with a (initially nonmagical) scimitar one-handed, +9 two-handed. Arcane pool, Discipline Focus (retrained first-level feat, which I qualify for with the Martial Training I and the combat training trait, plus Hone Weapon. That's leaving out if you have a higher strength or are using spells or maneuvers to boost damage more.

[Xerres]

I use Elemental Flux on my Hexcrafter. For two feats I get the Elemental Nimbus stance and can add my Intelligence modifier in Fire damage, and that's soon to double. Its Fire damage, so resistance is common, but basically adding my level to damage on every attack is still worth it. Especially since it doesn't require an action, its just 'on'. And I'm getting a few maneuvers that will let me ignore resistances, but since the recovery method is awful those are mostly one-shots.

I intend to go to at least the 5th level stance. I know I can get swim/burrow/flight from spells, but I want to have it constantly available. And the 3rd level stance is alright by me as well.

[AslanCross]

Sorry if this has already been answered, but I was reading the Mithral Current document and I noticed these two:

Endless Current: Boost - move up to 10 ft as a free action after every attack this round.

Crashing Wake: Strike - move up to 30 ft in any direction your normal movement allows and make a single attack against each opponent within reach along your movement path, dealing +4d6 damage with each attack.

How do these two maneuvers interact, exactly? I feel that after attacking the first person, should I choose to take the 10 foot move option from Endless Current, I end up canceling the movement from Crashing Wake and forfeit the rest of my attacks.

[MilleniaAntares]

I interpret it as Endless Current adding 10 feet of movement that don't count for Crashing Wake.

You can get crazy movement with that, but that's part of the charm!

[AslanCross]

I interpret it as Endless Current adding 10 feet of movement that don't count for Crashing Wake.

You can get crazy movement with that, but that's part of the charm!

You channel the momentum of your attacks into a leaping dance, allowing you to maneuver across the battlefield with every blow. After initiating this boost, you can move up to 10 ft. as a free action without provoking attacks of opportunity each time you make an attack until the start of your next turn.

From the wording of Endless Current, though, the bonus movement seems to come immediately after each attack. Would like some official clarification on this.

[Takamorisan]

I'm trying to convince my DM to let me pick the Warpath Follower Archetype for my Inquisitor, I've spent some time looking for discussions and support materials but didn't find anything really conclusive and he is really feeling cautious with the Archetype itself saying that having maneuvers and spells is something really dangerous for the game balance.

In my personal opinion, I don't think the Inquisitor spell list have this huge array of possibilities that could ruin the game, anyway what is the overall opinion about the archetype and do you think this feature could launch the class to T2 or T1, I really could use some insight from experienced players.

[CGNefarious]

I have a player for the campaign I'm starting soon who is doing a Warpath Inquisitor. To me her character doesn't seem much more powerful than a standard Inquisitor. Both your maneuvers and spells are diminished, so neither is all that powerful by itself. But you do have more options in combat, so it helps a bit with not being completely reliant on spell choice. Overall I like the archetype, but I personally haven't tried it.

Also worth noting is that the player in question is actually someone who has an outspoken hate for Path of War. I was actually quite surprised when she told me she was rolling one up. So I guess it has that going for it.

[Nyaa]

T2 or T1

I believe your question was answered on 4chan already. Extensively.

Quick cheat sheet for checking which tier does a class belong to:
1: prepared 9th level caster
2: spontaneous 9th level caster
3: 6th level caster or 9th level initiator with carefully selected supernatural disciplines

[Takamorisan]

I believe your question was answered on 4chan already. Extensively.

Quick cheat sheet for checking which tier does a class belong to:
1: prepared 9th level caster
2: spontaneous 9th level caster
3: 6th level caster or 9th level initiator with carefully selected supernatural disciplines

I know but the DM is the kind of guy that need "extensive" data type, didn't mean to say the answer in 4chan was wrong.

[Powerdork]

I'll second that; I would love some easy way to throw PoW into a campaign, opposing the PCs. Also, while I haven't dealt with it myself, I foresee a nightmare trying to build a high-level initiator. It's not like spontaneous casters where you just choose spells known of each level, but you'd have to build them up from first level in regards to maneuvers known.

Now, see, it doesn't need to be as time-intensive as building a 1st-level character and manually making changes with each level. You just need to manipulate the patterns.
For instance, every 4 non-harbinger (or your class of choice) hit dice means the starting maneuvers (and all subsequent maneuvers) can be 1 maneuver level higher, and 2 hit dice on top of that means access to new maneuver levels on even class levels instead of odds.
Take half the initiator's class level, and subtract 1, and you get to retrain that many lower-level maneuvers into maneuvers of a higher level; determine the maneuver level that the first retraining can get you, and shift 1 low-level maneuver there. You can do this once for each maneuver level.

Here's an example: A 7 HD undead takes 12 levels of warder.
He's got 5 maneuvers of up to 2nd level (4 hit dice), learns a 3rd level maneuver at warder 2 (spare 2 hit dice), and 2 maneuvers of each maneuver level above that up to 7th (1 from retraining, 1 learned naturally), plus a single maneuver retrained up to 8th. This means his starting 5 maneuvers are replaced with a 4th, a 5th, a 6th, a 7th, and an 8th. He can enter play with his highest level maneuver being up to 8th, with 2 maneuvers of each level below that (of course being able to select lower-level options).
Make the picks, toss in warder class features, select a handful of feats and we're golden.


That said, yeah, I wouldn't mind more well-thought-out guidelines for monsters than "Pick a handful of on-level maneuvers for the creature to use before it gets dunked; they refresh if the creature uses its signature ability."

[Thealtruistorc]

Forgive me if I am late to the party on this conversation.

When I was building a character recently, I noticed that Battle Dragon's Stance (thrashing dragon) is a straight-up upgrade to Outer Sphere Stance. This bugs me primarily because you cannot trade out stances in the way you can with maneuvers, and as a result OSS becomes irrelevant once you reach the level required for BDS. Are there plans to alter either of these stances, perhaps finding a way to make OSS more powerful or having it scale with level?

[Tuvarkz]

Forgive me if I am late to the party on this conversation.

When I was building a character recently, I noticed that Battle Dragon's Stance (thrashing dragon) is a straight-up upgrade to Outer Sphere Stance. This bugs me primarily because you cannot trade out stances in the way you can with maneuvers, and as a result OSS becomes irrelevant once you reach the level required for BDS. Are there plans to alter either of these stances, perhaps finding a way to make OSS more powerful or having it scale with level?

Thrashing Dragon, Broken Blade, and Primal Fury have been marked out for heavy changes with the errata that will come sometime (maybe soon, maybe not).

[thecrimsondawn]

Ive got a path of war question that just came up. I am working on a sneak attack build,and the new rogue archetype gives access to paths such as thrashing dragon and broken blade. Anyway, here it is.
If I use a strike, that gives more then one attack (aka - BB's steel flurry strike or TD's Swift Claws) and its a standard action to get said multiple attacks, would precision based damage apply on each attack, or only once? PoW bends a few of the rules when it comes to situations like this, so I need a clarification on it.

In normal cases, if your attack would apply sneak attack damage, every attack would apply sneak attack damage.
There are some cases in pathfinder that call out in its description precision based damage is only applied once.
This is multiple hits, but it is also only a single action, so it may not be truly hitting a vital point more then once.

[Ninjaxenomorph]

It's multiple attacks, so I would think SA would apply as normal.

[Forrestfire]

Sneak attack always applies to every valid hit unless something specifically says it doesn't.

[thecrimsondawn]

Sneak attack always applies to every valid hit unless something specifically says it doesn't.

Thanks for replying so quickly, game is today and I needed this answer :)

I may opt for primal fury and martial charge feat if that is the case. sneak attack with sap master with a strike at the end of every charge that counts as flat footed sneak attack damage for sap master...
would every hit count as flat footed tho? hmm...