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

[Forrestfire]

It depends on how you're doing it. If you're using stealth, I believe the first attack will trigger sneak attack, but the rest won't unless there's some other way that they're flat-footed (such as going before they've acted in a combat). I'm AFB right now so I'm not 100% sure about the stealth situation though.

[CGNefarious]

Generally attacking brings you out of stealth, so only the first attack would apply sneak attack damage. But if they're flat-footed or you're flanking them, etc., then sneak attack would apply to all attacks.

[thecrimsondawn]

Generally attacking brings you out of stealth, so only the first attack would apply sneak attack damage. But if they're flat-footed or you're flanking them, etc., then sneak attack would apply to all attacks.

Good to know, I am looking at the scout archetype that causes a flat footed situation as well as Steel Serpent Style's second feat.

[thecrimsondawn]

Oh one last question guys. The people that make PoW posted a beta test of a new unarmed path non too long ago. I seemed to have misplayed the playstest doc for it. Could one of you guys pass me the name of this new unarmed path or a link to the latest update of it if any? Gonna give it a run.

[khadgar567]

Oh one last question guys. The people that make PoW posted a beta test of a new unarmed path non too long ago. I seemed to have misplayed the playstest doc for it. Could one of you guys pass me the name of this new unarmed path or a link to the latest update of it if any? Gonna give it a run.

new beta stuff give us please

[EldritchWeaver]

Oh one last question guys. The people that make PoW posted a beta test of a new unarmed path non too long ago. I seemed to have misplayed the playstest doc for it. Could one of you guys pass me the name of this new unarmed path or a link to the latest update of it if any? Gonna give it a run.

You mean Fool's Errand?

[khadgar567]

You mean Fool's Errand?

then forget it

[thecrimsondawn]

You mean Fool's Errand?

Thats the one! Thanks!
It has the Brawler archetype my roomy needs. The whole lock system is a bit...odd tho. Not sure how I feel about it. It opens up a few can of worms since its a Ref save instead of a CMB roll, and im not fully clear on how it interacts with being grappled, or grappling, Also many of the moves are very lack luster early on, but my god wtf strong later on. Still, its a good path.

I dont suppose the medic class was updated by any chance eh?

[ihave2cows]

So, I realize that I'm a bit late to the party (forgive me I'm a pleb that relies on the SRD and wasn't aware that this expansion was even a thing until recently) but I have a question that pertains to the Riven Hourglass discipline.

The Heart of the Timelord counter maneuver scares me. I realize that it's a pretty high level maneuver, but it's still a maneuver, not a spell, that can essentially replicate an instantly cast true ressurection on yourself. I understand that it's not quite as strong (you heal for 150 hp, not full, but most characters won't have much more than that at max level anyways) but aside from something petrifying the initiator I don't see how the user can ever die since they can at their slowest refresh it as a standard action on their turn. And since it's an immediate action and not a swift action, you don't even have to worry about playing conservatively with your other maneuvers to make sure you can keep your get out of jail free card.

Is this maneuver completely broken or am I just missing something obvious?

[Tuvarkz]

So, I realize that I'm a bit late to the party (forgive me I'm a pleb that relies on the SRD and wasn't aware that this expansion was even a thing until recently) but I have a question that pertains to the Riven Hourglass discipline.

The Heart of the Timelord counter maneuver scares me. I realize that it's a pretty high level maneuver, but it's still a maneuver, not a spell, that can essentially replicate an instantly cast true ressurection on yourself. I understand that it's not quite as strong (you heal for 150 hp, not full, but most characters won't have much more than that at max level anyways) but aside from something petrifying the initiator I don't see how the user can ever die since they can at their slowest refresh it as a standard action on their turn. And since it's an immediate action and not a swift action, you don't even have to worry about playing conservatively with your other maneuvers to make sure you can keep your get out of jail free card.

Is this maneuver completely broken or am I just missing something obvious?

Well,
1) Doesn't work if you're caught flat-footed by an attack and can't counter
2) Won't work if you had to burn your (in most cases) only immediate action to dodge a save or suck
3) Won't work against a natural 20 attack.
4) This is something a player will rarely have to face, but at higher levels, the 150 hp healing can be outdamaged through
5) You need to recover the maneuver after using it. This is largely annoying for users of granted maneuvers or for swift-action recovery users (or any class other than Warder that is using a full-round to recover maneuvers).

[ihave2cows]

Well,
1) Doesn't work if you're caught flat-footed by an attack and can't counter
2) Won't work if you had to burn your (in most cases) only immediate action to dodge a save or suck
3) Won't work against a natural 20 attack.
4) This is something a player will rarely have to face, but at higher levels, the 150 hp healing can be outdamaged through
5) You need to recover the maneuver after using it. This is largely annoying for users of granted maneuvers or for swift-action recovery users (or any class other than Warder that is using a full-round to recover maneuvers).

1) This is fair. Though there's a lot of ways to circumvent being caught flat-footed, aside from the obvious "don't get caught."
2) I feel like if you were low enough on HP to be close to dying, the enemy either wouldn't bother trying to cast a save-or-suck, the initiator wouldn't bother trying to counter the save-or-suck, or the enemies wouldn't have enough power/actions to do both unless there was a group of them all singling out one person and for some reason the rest of the party is useless in comparison.
3) Why's that? I understand that a natural 20 always hits, but the maneuver doesn't negate the attack. It's effectively a heal spell that casts automatically after the damage is applied. It's a reaction to being hit rather than an attack incoming.
5) I haven't familiarized myself with all of the new classes and archetypes yet, but from what I've seen all the full-round actions are perfectly viable choices. Maybe not fully efficient compared to actual maneuvers, but all of them have some positive rider effect. I can understand it being annoying for classes that rely on swift action recovery though. But the fact that you can recover it at all still gives it potential infinite value to just completely nullify encounters with.

All in all it still strikes me as a hyper effective safety net that I feel like would still be arguably overpowered even as a capstone maneuver. I'd certainly feel justified swapping it with the current capstone at any rate. It might not cover EVERY SINGLE encounter, but for the 90% it does cover it basically just turns the battle into a prolonged cakewalk. It's the kind of ability that feels like something a full spellcaster would combine multiple spells or prepare in advance to create, and while it may not be better than a full spellcaster it still isn't the kind of thing I'd like to see in a game. Its a single ability that feels like the peak achievement of a T2 class.

[Elricaltovilla]

3) Why's that? I understand that a natural 20 always hits, but the maneuver doesn't negate the attack. It's effectively a heal spell that casts automatically after the damage is applied. It's a reaction to being hit rather than an attack incoming.

To quote the Systems and Use chapter of Path of War:

Critical Hit vs. Counter

As this is bound to come up at the gaming table at least once in a while, a player or the GM will roll a natural 20 against a creature or player and the decision to use a counter will arise. Relax, here's the answer. Counters may be used against a critical hit except if the threatening attack roll was a natural 20. Critical hits from weapons with increased threat ranges (such as rapiers) can be countered if the threatening attack roll was not a 20.

So you cannot use a counter against an attack that was a natural 20.

[Powerdork]

To quote the Systems and Use chapter of Path of War:



So you cannot use a counter against an attack that was a natural 20.

What about counters that are not against attacks per se?

[Ninjaxenomorph]

Those couldn't be against a crit, so I would think those would work.

[ihave2cows]

"When the sands within your Hourglass finally run dry, you can force your timeline to restart, willing the sands to reverse within your soul and restore what has been lost. You can initiate this counter in response to taking damage that would reduce you to 0 hit points or less."
The wording leads me to believe that it isn't designating an attack, especially since it doesn't even use the word attack in it. Just "taking damage that would reduce you to 0 hit points."

[oyzar]

I can't find the answer to this anywhere:

Does Stalker's Murderous Insight allow you to reroll only one attack or all attacks for 1+wis rounds?

Edit: Here is the answer: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/shows...&postcount=233

[oyzar]

I'm a bit confused about the number of stalker/judge arts a judge receives. It says the stalker art received at 3rd level is replaced, but then they get something called judge arts starting at 7th level. A stalker normally gets arts at 1st, 3rd, 7th, 11th etc? Did the 1st level art get replaced somewhere? Or do they perhaps get 2 arts starting at 7th level? I'm guessing it's supposed to be arts at 1st, 7th, 11th etc. That's really hard to read from the text though, is that correct?

[thecrimsondawn]

I have a question related to Fools Errand and the lock mechanic - More specifically, the dragging part of lock.

I am about to play a brawler with the new archetype, and I noticed it can give up its movement to drag his locked target up to the distance he would have moved, however he must still be within reach. I found this completely useless since you can move WITH them with normal locked rules. The Contender's ability to drag them is more like a reposition in that sense, but it made me look at the core lock rules and it sparked a question -

How does the drag function work with lock? It uses the term drag a few times, but not once talking about a CMB check as per the combat move drag. Is it simply a 'force your target to move as you see fit' drag that is superior to the drag CMB in nearly every way, or am I misunderstanding something here?

Thanks in advance for any feedback related to this. :)

[freduncio]

The Concealed Recovery art states that when you recovery maneuvers (full-round and standard) you gain concealment. It's easy to understand the full-round, but for how long it lasts when you recovery as a standard? Also, the bushi stalker (with his move action- recovery) does also gain the concealment? And how long it last?

[Ninjaxenomorph]

The Concealed Recovery art states that when you recovery maneuvers (full-round and standard) you gain concealment. It's easy to understand the full-round, but for how long it lasts when you recovery as a standard? Also, the bushi stalker (with his move action- recovery) does also gain the concealment? And how long it last?

The Bushi doesn't just recover as a move action; if you can sheathe as a free action, 1/round you can recover a maneuver for free.

As a side note, I was very happy when I realized how great a weapon for the setting I have a hand in making, a retractable arm-mounted blade that can be activated and retracted as a free action with Quick Draw (swift without), is for Mithral Current. And using that I could roughly make a character from my writing that uses those weapons. Only downside is ideally he would be a Dervish Defender, as opposed to the comically easy to set up Stalker (two stalker talents nets EWP since they are monk weapons, plus the Finesse+Deadly Agility talent).

[digiman619]

Dumb question: While I'm glad we got martial archetypes for non-initiators, but I have to question the chosen classes; Why do Psychic Warriors and Warpriests (a.k.a.: Psionic Gish: The Class and Divine Gish: The Class, respectively) get initiation options, but none for Brawlers or Swashbucklers? In fact, there are no less than 7 6th casters (or the psionic equivalent thereof) that have martial archetypes, and 6 full BAB classes (a.k.a. "martials in the non-PoW/ToB sense") that don't! That's not counting the 3/4th BAB classes that interesting options like the Vigilante. And don't tell me "We did Core classes before Base and Hybrid classes", as almost all of the 6th casters (the psionic obviously notwithstanding) are base or hybrid classes.

tl;dr: Why did you give intitating archetypes to 6th casters when not all the 4th casting or noncasting classes didn't have one yet?

[master4sword]

Dumb question: While I'm glad we got martial archetypes for non-initiators, but I have to question the chosen classes; Why do Psychic Warriors and Warpriests (a.k.a.: Psionic Gish: The Class and Divine Gish: The Class, respectively) get initiation options, but none for Brawlers or Swashbucklers? In fact, there are no less than 7 6th casters (or the psionic equivalent thereof) that have martial archetypes, and 6 full BAB classes (a.k.a. "martials in the non-PoW/ToB sense") that don't! That's not counting the 3/4th BAB classes that interesting options like the Vigilante. And don't tell me "We did Core classes before Base and Hybrid classes", as almost all of the 6th casters (the psionic obviously notwithstanding) are base or hybrid classes.

tl;dr: Why did you give intitating archetypes to 6th casters when not all the 4th casting or noncasting classes didn't have one yet?

If I'm not mistaken, Psychic Warriors got one with PoW1 alongside Soulknives when it was just the two classes getting'em, and Warpriest only got one because the archetype for inquisitors became a class template - you'll notice that the only Advanced Class Guide classes that got archetypes were the class templates for Warpriest and Investigator. I do know that for most of the PoW:E playtest they were avoiding Advanced Class Guide content because it was "too new", which it WAS when the playtest content initially came out. Hence why the animal companion-focused Ranger archetype didn't end up as a Hunter archetype (the class that focuses more heavily on the companion).

[Elricaltovilla]

Dumb question: While I'm glad we got martial archetypes for non-initiators, but I have to question the chosen classes; Why do Psychic Warriors and Warpriests (a.k.a.: Psionic Gish: The Class and Divine Gish: The Class, respectively) get initiation options, but none for Brawlers or Swashbucklers? In fact, there are no less than 7 6th casters (or the psionic equivalent thereof) that have martial archetypes, and 6 full BAB classes (a.k.a. "martials in the non-PoW/ToB sense") that don't! That's not counting the 3/4th BAB classes that interesting options like the Vigilante. And don't tell me "We did Core classes before Base and Hybrid classes", as almost all of the 6th casters (the psionic obviously notwithstanding) are base or hybrid classes.

tl;dr: Why did you give intitating archetypes to 6th casters when not all the 4th casting or noncasting classes didn't have one yet?

Because when we started PoW:E the Advanced Class Guide was either just ending playtest or otherwise not published yet (it's been a while, hard to remember exactly). The only reason Warpriest and Investigator got class templates are because I fought to get them included as part of the whole Class Templates thing. This was compounded by the need to keep the book within a certain page length. Not ever class that could get an archetype did get one, that doesn't necessarily mean they won't get one in the future though. We were in playtest for a long time, a lot of stuff happened over the course of those 2.5 years, accounting for all of it would be impossible. We'd never get the book out.

[Ninjaxenomorph]

I know there's a brawler archetype that's going to be with the Fools Errand release. I think an swashbuckler initiating archetype might be interesting, though; I'm one of the few that like the class.

[EdinoiZ]

So I completely missed this thread, and what better way to get it answered than by the people who made PoW:E or the people who have been talking alot with them?

So I was looking at a few style feats from PoW:E and I came across a very peculiar thing.

There is seemingly not a single style feat from Path of War: Expanded that require you to actually be in the style (spending a swift action to enter it) for them to function.

Every last one of them lack that oh so very important line of "While using this style," that can be found in all the Paizo style feats. Does that mean that the PoW:E style feats are all "passive" feats in the style of Dodge, or Death From Above? Could they perhaps be combined without requiring you to be a Master of Many Styles or a Free-Style Fighter?

Now, I just want to know what people think about this. I know what I'm hoping for as this could let me combine the Primal Fury Style, Piercing Thunder Style up to Trample, and the Bullette Charging Style up to Rampage for some real nice charge-based action.

[Anlashok]

They're still style feats, though. So even if it's not explicitly stated they still follow the general rules for style feats.

[EdinoiZ]

They're still style feats, though. So even if it's not explicitly stated they still follow the general rules for style feats.

Ugh, missed that part of the Style Feats entry from paizo >.<

[neversterling]

tl;dr: Why did you give intitating archetypes to 6th casters when not all the 4th casting or noncasting classes didn't have one yet?

I find there is enough similarities between the initiating archetypes that you can apply them as templates to similar classes without too much fuss. At least in the case of Slayer and Swashbuckler.

Hidden Blade rogue archetype goes on Slayer with absolutely no problem, since Slayer Talents and Rogue Talents are so similar.

The Myrmidon trades 4 feats for it's initiating, so there's precedence for the Swashbuckler to trade feats 4, 8, 12, and 16 for initiating, and possibly gaining access to the Myrmidon deeds since the swash has native access. Just change the mental ability score to Charisma and you're good.

Bloodrager and Hunter are harder.

[exelsisxax]

I find there is enough similarities between the initiating archetypes that you can apply them as templates to similar classes without too much fuss. At least in the case of Slayer and Swashbuckler.

Hidden Blade rogue archetype goes on Slayer with absolutely no problem, since Slayer Talents and Rogue Talents are so similar.

The Myrmidon trades 4 feats for it's initiating, so there's precedence for the Swashbuckler to trade feats 4, 8, 12, and 16 for initiating, and possibly gaining access to the Myrmidon deeds since the swash has native access. Just change the mental ability score to Charisma and you're good.

Bloodrager and Hunter are harder.

Hunter shouldn't be hard, being almost a ranger archetype. Just dropping martial style for teamworks feats and tricks does most of the theme fixing.

[upho]

I have a question related to Fools Errand and the lock mechanic - More specifically, the dragging part of lock.

I am about to play a brawler with the new archetype, and I noticed it can give up its movement to drag his locked target up to the distance he would have moved, however he must still be within reach. I found this completely useless since you can move WITH them with normal locked rules. The Contender's ability to drag them is more like a reposition in that sense, but it made me look at the core lock rules and it sparked a question -

How does the drag function work with lock? It uses the term drag a few times, but not once talking about a CMB check as per the combat move drag. Is it simply a 'force your target to move as you see fit' drag that is superior to the drag CMB in nearly every way, or am I misunderstanding something here?

Thanks in advance for any feedback related to this. :)

First off, the word "drag" is the normal English word, it does not refer to the drag combat maneuver and never does lock require you to make a drag combat maneuver check (if it did, the rules text for lock would have said so). Now AFAIK, there are three important differences between the normal dragging with lock and more flexible dragging enabled by the contender's Point of Contention ability:

1. When dragging creatures using normal lock, you must change position. When the contender uses the special drag mechanic of PoC, he must NOT change position.
2. When dragging creatures using normal lock, they "move in the same direction as you, relative to your spaces" (my emphasis). When the contender uses the special drag mechanic of PoC, he can "move each creature he is locking up to the distance... /snip/ ...within his reach... /snip/ ... he could have moved while dragging them" (my emphasis). Meaning the dragged creatures' position in relation to the contender's position changes when he uses PoC, which it does not do when using the normal lock's drag mechanic.
3. When dragging creatures using normal lock, "if you would drag a creature into a space that can’t support them or a hazardous location (such as the air for a nonflying creature or a pit of lava), they may make a saving throw to escape the lock". When the contender uses the special drag mechanic of PoC, the dragged creatures get no such saving throw.

Spoiler: Draggin with Lock and PoC explained - with Pictures

Show

B = Brawler PC (enlarged)
E = Locked enemy

The brawler would like to throw the locked enemy into the green acid bath in the upper corner. Using the normal drag of lock, he cannot do so without ending up in the acid himself as well, regardless of how he moves and drags the enemy along. And even if he did put himself in the acid as well, the locked enemy would get a save to break free from the lock when the brawler started moving (and the enemy would fall prone if it managed to break free). But by using the drag of PoC, the brawler may safely put the enemy into the acid without the need of any dice to see whether he succeeds or not.

I hope this makes it easier to understand. After having playtested a contender myself, I can say the added flexibility of PoC can often make a big difference, especially when used with maneuvers granting movement.

If anyone finds an error here, please let me and thecrimsondawn know!