Avatar Martial Artist - Balancing only, post new styles in the other thread

[Lakoda]

I don't know if I exactly understand what you are suggesting. Are you suggesting that the weapon master thing be expanded as a full 20-level style? and/or broken up amongst different types of weapons and such? I don't know if I could come up with a full 20-level progression for all of that, but maybe the smaller progressions for each? Maybe allow for the progression to be taken earlier and possibly starting at 1st level? Theoretically, we could combine every single melee-type into this one class and it provides built in, easy multi-classing. That might work just work...

I think we would need special styles for each type of weapon since the weapon strike feature makes weapon damage irrelevant.

It wasn't so much of a suggestion as a wish. To clarify, I was wishing for both (20 level progression & division by weapon type).

I know 20 levels of a weapon (let alone 20 levels for each [type] of weapon is daunting) but a lot of the features are is already present, they just need the same sort of 'flavor' as the martial artists have.

I maybe wrong here, but the MA is a feat tree for each form/style. The weapon master would be something similar, the work really is just giving good names and building the tree from existing functionality and adding 1 or 2 new things for flare. It's still a butt load of work but it isn't as much raw creation as you've don't for the MA (and especially for the benders). d20/D&D is already built heavily around weapon based combat, hand to hand was extremely laking.

Weapon Master should probably be in a separate thread too, if you wanted to go forward with it as a collection of weapons/weapon types. It certainly works as a prestige form to the MA. It's you work, so I won't step on any toes.

<snip> But not you gotta make it balances well enough. I think against benders this class would be do well enough, but let's say against a ranger? I'm not going to say much about Barbarians, as those guys can take it like the best of them... and since we've effectively cut out all the casting classes, what's left to compare them to the lowest denominator? The one good thing I guess is that through this the power levels over all are definitely less staggered.

If I ran a campaign with these classes (which I will probably do) I wouldn't allow Barbs and Rangers as they don't really fit in my view of the world, so I don't know if you need to balance against them.

That reminded me of the fire nation sniper guys (the YuuYan I think). That sort of skill screams for a full 20 level progression (or a prestige off of a ranged/archer weapon class).

[Lord Tataraus]

That reminded me of the fire nation sniper guys (the YuuYan I think). That sort of skill screams for a full 20 level progression (or a prestige off of a ranged/archer weapon class).

Gah! That's what I was going to do! A ranged style, thanks for reminding me and look for some sort of ranged style before the end of the week, though I will probably rip a lot of it off of my Archer class in my LotR D20. In fact it might be exactly the same since I love that class.

[Lord Tataraus]

Well, I was a little faster than expected. Presenting the Hawk-Eye Sniper!!

THis style is focused mostly on taking precise shots with a ranged weapon and then at higher levels you can take a few pot-shots until 18th level you can make a lot of quick shots. And all of this combined with manyshot. As a note and possible clarification, any ability that requires a "full-round action to make a single attack with a ranged weapon" means any attack that requires one attack roll qualifies, including willingly forgoing an iterative attacks you would normally make. Also, a ranged weapon is any weapon that has a listed range increment such as crossbows, straight bows, daggers, throwing axes, etc. But if you use a weapon in melee, it is not considered a ranged weapon for that attack.

Any other clarifications or questions?

[Lakoda]

Does the dex bonus to dmg from True Shot stack with the str dmg from thrown weapons or the dmg bonus from mighty bows? The harder you throw something the less accuracy you have, generally speaking.

Defensive Archer, is the AoO a melee attack or a ranged. The addition of allow melee attacks with your ranged weapon implies that the AoO is a melee attack. A bow is like a quarter staff, but what about xbows? Also, does the ability to attack with your bow as a qstaff w/o penalties work for normal attacks (ie: now and AoO)?

{edit: more questions/comments}
Eek! Doom Shot is save or die. Not a big fan of that mechanic, what about save or take x2 or x3 dmg, or save or unconscious.

Improved Focused Shot and Deadly Missile seem like they should cost 1 ki point to me.

I'm a little confused on Master of the Horizon. I could use clarification on how Far Shot relates to this, as it affects Thrown and Ranges weapons differently. Also shouldn't "If you have the Far Shot feat, instead double the range increment. This increase applies after the increase from Ranged Weapon Mastery." say Far Shot instead, I didn't think RWM gave a range increase.

[Lord Tataraus]

Does the dex bonus to dmg from True Shot stack with the str dmg from thrown weapons or the dmg bonus from mighty bows? The harder you throw something the less accuracy you have, generally speaking.

Defensive Archer, is the AoO a melee attack or a ranged. The addition of allow melee attacks with your ranged weapon implies that the AoO is a melee attack. A bow is like a quarter staff, but what about xbows? Also, does the ability to attack with your bow as a qstaff w/o penalties work for normal attacks (ie: now and AoO)?

First the True Strike question:

True Shot: At 4th level, whenever you take a full round action to make a single attack with a ranged weapon, you may add you dexterity modifier to the damage. This is in addition to any extra damage due to strength such as with a thrown weapon or composite bow.

The emphasis should explain it. True, the harder you through something, the less accurate, but the strength damage is just your natural strength, not like a power throw.

Defensive Archer allows you to use a melee attack or ranged attack for AoOs, all ranged weapons including bows, crossbows, etc. that don't have melee damage are treated as clubs (originally said qstaff, but I've fixed that). The ability to make melee attacks can be used for any attack.

[Darkbane]

I think allowing Weapon Focus/Specialization with all ranged weapons is a bit much; it takes an epic feat (Epic Prowess) to give you +1 to all attacks, and the sniper's attacks will be mostly ranged. Also, increase the ki point cost for Doom Shot, Swift Shot, and Hawk Shot.

[Lord Tataraus]

I think allowing Weapon Focus/Specialization with all ranged weapons is a bit much; it takes an epic feat (Epic Prowess) to give you +1 to all attacks, and the sniper's attacks will be mostly ranged.

You're right. I originally had it as a choose one weapon then at higher levels you could spend an hour to re-spec. I guess I'll put that back in...

[Lakoda]

First the True Strike question:

The emphasis should explain it. True, the harder you through something, the less accurate, but the strength damage is just your natural strength, not like a power throw.

Defensive Archer allows you to use a melee attack or ranged attack for AoOs, all ranged weapons including bows, crossbows, etc. that don't have melee damage are treated as clubs (originally said qstaff, but I've fixed that). The ability to make melee attacks can be used for any attack.

bah!, how did I miss that. You're right about the str thing, I was looking at it from a different perspective.

I added more questions to my list but you all got to talking before I finished my edit, so here are the questions I added:

Eek! Doom Shot is save or die. Not a big fan of that mechanic, what about save or take x2 or x3 dmg, or save or unconscious.

Improved Focused Shot and Deadly Missile seem like they should cost 1 ki point to me.

I'm a little confused on Master of the Horizon. I could use clarification on how Far Shot relates to this, as it affects Thrown and Ranges weapons differently. Also shouldn't "If you have the Far Shot feat, instead double the range increment. This increase applies after the increase from Ranged Weapon Mastery." say Far Shot instead, I didn't think RWM gave a range increase.

[Lord Tataraus]

bah!, how did I miss that. You're right about the str thing, I was looking at it from a different perspective.

I added more questions to my list but you all got to talking before I finished my edit, so here are the questions I added:

Eek! Doom Shot is save or die. Not a big fan of that mechanic, what about save or take x2 or x3 dmg, or save or unconscious.

Improved Focused Shot and Deadly Missile seem like they should cost 1 ki point to me.

I'm a little confused on Master of the Horizon. I could use clarification on how Far Shot relates to this, as it affects Thrown and Ranges weapons differently. Also shouldn't "If you have the Far Shot feat, instead double the range increment. This increase applies after the increase from Ranged Weapon Mastery." say Far Shot instead, I didn't think RWM gave a range increase.

I'm just too quick!

Doom Shot is a carry over from the previous class, so I was thinking of changing it since it is some much more powerful here (where SoD's don't exist). I was having trouble figuring out what to do, but I like your suggestion of double/triple damage.

I don't want the Focused Shots to require Ki, so if you run out you still have something neat to do. As for Deadly Missile, I guess Ki would be needed...

Master of the Horizon: First off let's look at those feats,

Far Shot - When you use a projectile weapon, such as a bow, its range increment increases by one-half (multiply by 1½). When you use a thrown weapon, its range increment is doubled.

So, Far Shot normally increase by 1/2 for projectile weapons, but with Master of the Horizon it doubles the range. This has no additional effect for thrown weapons (they still get doubled instead).

Ranged Weapon Mastery - Any Ranged X damage-type weapon you wield has a +2 bonus on attack & damage –and– +20ft range
increment.

Emphasis mine. So basically for calculating the range take the original, add the 20ft for RWM then increase it by either the 25% or 100%.

I hope that clears it up.

[Lakoda]

I think I got it. Under MotH the Far Shot bonus is ignored in exchange for a the additional +75%.

To clarify, I was only suggesting that Improved Focused Shot use points - either way you're right the class needs something when all the points are gone. I could see splitting Doom Shot in half; one ability to function as adamantine (which would require a point) and one ability to function as one size bigger which I could see as being in affect all of the time (possibly, maybe...).

In the end I like it. It fits with the other classes (functionally speaking) very well. (we already know the fluff fits). Oh and btw, Master of the Horizon is a really kick ass name.

[Lakoda]

You're right. I originally had it as a choose one weapon then at higher levels you could spend an hour to re-spec. I guess I'll put that back in...

With Multi-Weapon Mastery it might be meaningful to open up the greater weapon focus/specialization feats to the Sniper. They're not fighters but they should have access to these feats if they want to take them. Either that or a mod for the fighter only feats should be enacted stating which of the Avatar classes are to be treated as fighters (and under what circumstances that happens) - especially if fighters are replaced Weapon Masters.

[Partysan]

(I think I don't have to say that this is great^^)

I read that people think that a multiclassed water/earth/air etc. martial artist would outclass the fighter etc etc.
Now I don't actually think that you should be able to multiclass between the different elemental styles that easily - each one belongs to a different (and partly hostile) culture and the have great differences in techniques and philosophy (think of Aang trying to learn earth bending). Fluffwise I cannot imagine a martial artist mixing those styles wildly.
I wouldn't forbid to multiclass like you cannot multiclass between benders (which is impossible unless you are the Avatar) but I think it is highly unlikely that someone would have levels in 3(!) of these styles.
I think some restriction for multiclassing between the element styles would make some sense. Something like the Paladin maybe, if you take levels in another style you cannot take levels in your first anymore (Fluff: you have switched the sides and/or changed your philosophy of fighting), maybe a feat to eliminate that restriction for one pairing (one feat for each possible pairing) (Fluff: you study the style of your enemies to counter it or you have managed to keep a a balance).
Examples:
1. A young dragon scholar doesn't want to fight against the earth kingdom anymore, because he knows that it is an unjust war. He runs away to some earth people and after fighting at their side for some battles he does adopt their fighting style. He takes some levels in mountain protector, but cannot learn more techniques of the dragon scholar.
2. Said young fire soldier after a while realizes that his knowledge in dragon scholar's techniques is not a shame but a chance. He begins to train his old techniques again and tries to combine them. He takes a feat that allows him to multiclass between mountain protector and dragon scholar.
3. His mates from the earth kingdom decide to use his knowledge about the fiery techniques. They take the feat and learn from him to know their enemy.

imo in the avatar world there are no people that just learn the fighting style of every nation. Most of them know only one. However as there may be cases in which there is a sense behind the combination I would restrict but not forbid it. However I can hardly see someone combining more than two of these styles.

About the fighter: I must say that there really should be a non-element class for armed combat, like e.g. Sokka or Jet probably would have. But 20 levels for each weapon and weapon combination, that is just too much. I'd rather have weapon style feats especially fitting for the avatar world. Maybe I'll make some if I have time.

[Lord Tataraus]

I think I got it. Under MotH the Far Shot bonus is ignored in exchange for a the additional +75%.

Correct.

To clarify, I was only suggesting that Improved Focused Shot use points - either way you're right the class needs something when all the points are gone. I could see splitting Doom Shot in half; one ability to function as adamantine (which would require a point) and one ability to function as one size bigger which I could see as being in affect all of the time (possibly, maybe...).

I assume you are referring to Deadly Missile? If so, the adamantine part doesn't really do much since nothing really has damage reduction bypassed by adamantine. Mostly that's for damage vs objects. I think I'll keep it like it is for now, playtesting might change it. Unfortunately, if you wanted to playtest it, it seems Ceiling beat you to it.

In the end I like it. It fits with the other classes (functionally speaking) very well. (we already know the fluff fits). Oh and btw, Master of the Horizon is a really kick ass name.

You really think that name is that awesome? I guess it doesn't seem so amazing to me 'cause I made it...and ripped it off the old ability Horizon Archer. Though, know that I think about it, I did think that was a very appropriate name when I made the Archer class (seems like a long time ago, but that thread pops up all the time).

And now I'm rambling.

[Ceiling009]

The Class has it as built in multiclass (style), its not different classes. And while these do like they are tied to nations, but they are more tied to philosophies; which have no no borders or allegiances. In the current setting, it's less likely to encounter people who practice more than one, but it's not entirely impossible nor would it really take a feat to "multiclass" between the two styles. I think they're like fighting schools, the same way there are spell schools. Since there are now... 4 unarmed/armed style philosophies, 1 ranged style, it has basically replaced every melee or weapon based class... except maybe classes that encourage one or two hander styles, and in Avatar, the rare weapon and board style. Really if you think about it, in Avatar world, there are really 3 archetypes, Bender, Fighter, and Sideliner. Benders take over the Cleric/Caster/Monk archetypes... This Martial Artist, takes over every thing else really, except maybe the rogue. In a standard game, these guys are still no match for properly prepared casters, but they easily outclass fighter and ranger; barbarian to me really still embodies the wild lawless warriors... and I think can pretty much hold his own still. I'm just saying in a standard game, Ranger, Fighter, and maybe Barbarian could be over shadowed by this class.

[Lakoda]

I assume you are referring to Deadly Missile?

Yes I was ... Copy & Paste strikes again.

As for the name, I like it a lot b/c it instantly reminds me of the episode with them; specifically the shot that hits the blue spirit in the head.

[Lord Tataraus]

The playtesting Battle Arena is up and recruiting combatants! Come gladiators of the four nations! Test your mettle against the best of the best, see your rivials break in half before you or destroy you with uber-cheesiness! Come one, come all!!

[levi]

This seems to be a really good thing you've got going on here. It seems to fit nicely with the benders and the rest of the Avatar universe. You have made good progress towards replacing the monk and many of the other melee classes.

You've replaced the monk, made decent inroads on replacing the fighter, and replaced one of the two ranger styles. All that leaves is rouge, bararian, and the other half of ranger.

Now the other half of the ranger could be easily done with an expansion of weapon master or the creation of full blown weapon styles. Personally I think a series of 10 level styles for single weapon, dual weilding, and sword and board could work out nicely. It would also be cool to see something for finesse based styles and other things, such as sneak attack (and related stuff), Dim Mak (ala Tai Li), and berserker rage (ala Barbarians).

I also think that these sorts of styles (except, possibly the Dim Mak stuff) should be allowed from level one. At this point you'd have replaced (from a fighting style perspective) all the martial classes. Which, honestly, doesn't seem like a bad thing to me (for this setting).

Another cool thing about making such weapon styles is that we could attempt to fix the often cited balance issues with the three main weapon styles in standard d20. (The usual argument is that single weapon is superior in most cases, dual weilding is only good if you have extra dice like sneak attack, and that sword and board is hosed. It's kind of sad.)

Half casters could easily be replaced by multiclassing a bender class and martial artist. About the only thing I see as not being replicatable by such as system would be the skill ***** aspect of rouges. Perhaps they could just multiclass as Experts, but Expert is a pretty weak class.

If you want some help developing these other styles myself and others are interested, I'm sure I could come up with some ideas. (Plus, I'm sure I'm not the only one.)

So, do you think we should go all out? It definetly seems possible (and desireable) to do so within this framework.

[Lord Tataraus]

I would like to keep both the Barbarian and Rogue. Both are standards and they work every well. I see no reason to redo them because I would just end up remaking them almost exactly the same. We need some variation. As for weapon styles, I do want to get a few maybe 10 level things for basic TWF, Dex-based melee, one-handed sword, and polearm. First off, remember that Avatar is an eastern setting with definite Japanese, Chinese, and Indian influences. Two-handed swords are closer to polearms than European greatswords. Sword & board largely does not exist except in the Indian-type areas. Also, while I am not a scholar of such, I do like to hold true to actual fighting styles. TWF would largely be with small weapons or Tiger Head Hook Swords. The one-handed sword would be a katana, and not the uber weapon most of the world thinks it is. Polearms are mostly glaives and spears possibly nagamaki or naginata, but we have not seen any yet.

If you know anything of these weapons, go ahead and make some styles, however, I might be ruthless in my critiques especially with the katana. You have been warned, but also encouraged, you might learn something to! I would highly suggest researching the style you choose, that usually helps.

[jindra34]

What if any flexible weapons would be included and would there be a matching/ apropriate style?

[Lord Tataraus]

What if any flexible weapons would be included and would there be a matching/ apropriate style?

By flexible weapons you mean like sabres, rapiers, small swords, etc.? To my knowledge, no such weapons would exist. Most swords are single-edged weapons (though a European longsword did show up). The culture didn't support those types of weapons much, though if you can find proof of them, an appropriate style could be created.

[jindra34]

By flexible weapons you mean like sabres, rapiers, small swords, etc.? To my knowledge, no such weapons would exist. Most swords are single-edged weapons (though a European longsword did show up). The culture didn't support those types of weapons much, though if you can find proof of them, an appropriate style could be created.

Flexible as in weighted chains, chain blades, multi-section staffs and nunchuks.

[Lord Tataraus]

Flexible as in weighted chains, chain blades, multi-section staffs and nunchuks.

Ah...of course. Sure, you want to make a style? Go ahead, I've got the Battle Arena to run, so I don't have much time plus I want to fill a dead level in the Hawk-Eye Sniper before testing...and I have school...ugh. But I love making this stuff, so its all good.

Edit: And I don't know much about those fighting styles, so my critiques won't be very harsh (if that's an incentive).

[Ceiling009]

For flexible weapons like he chain and the staff, I could see the Ocean Sentinel use them too, but they have a different focus really; so it should warrant a style in it of itself.

[Lord Tataraus]

So...is anyone up to the task of making weapon type styles? Or were they just suggestions for me to do so? I might take on the task at some point, but I'm a little worn out right now, so if some one starts some up I'll help as much as I can.

[Thantos]

I would love to but I am not all that good at finding a balance with in a class so I will start it and if you wonderful people could balance it for me I would...well...very estactic(SP).

I want to make a two weapon fighting friendly style. So on to the Slashing master(needs a better name though).

[levi]

Well, I said I'd be willing to help with making weapon styles. I don't think I know quite enough about the balance of DnD weapon combat to do it alone, but I'd be willing to help. I also know a fair bit about eastern martial arts, but am not a student and/or have exhasutive knowledge, so some help would be appreciated.

However, I do have something to contribute right now. It's nothing much, simply stats for katana and related swords that aren't uberweapons, but rather, I belive, accurately reflect them in the d20 system.

{table=head]Category | Small | Medium | Critical | Cost | Weight | Profiency
Light | 1d2 | 1d3 | 18-20/x2 | ... | ... |Simple
Light | 1d3 | 1d4 | 18-20/x2 | ... | ... | Martial
One Handed | 1d4 | 1d6 | 18-20/x2 | ... | ... | Martial
One Handed* | 1d6 | 1d8 | 18-20/x2 | ... | ... | Exotic*
Two Handed | 1d8 | 1d10 | 18-20/x2 | ... | ... | Martial
Two Handed | 1d10 | 2d6 | 18-20/x2 | ... | ... | Exotic
[/table]
* Or Two Handed as a Martial weapon.

These are simply curved analogs of the basic (european) swords. The names are simply examples. Other weapons can fall into theses catagories. (In fact, the Wakizashi is the same as a Scimitar.) If someone could help me out with costs and realistic (rather than silly inflated) weights, that'd be cool.

As for the Katana based style, should we make Kenjutsu and Iajutsu seperate styles (it'd be more realistic) or combine them into one (it'd be simpler)?

As for actuall flexible weapons (as opposed to chain weapons) there are actually several Traditional Chinese Kung Fu weapons that could be catagorized as such: some Jains, the Butterfly Sword (not to be confused with Butterfly Knives) and the Bamboo Spear. Whether any such weapons have appeared on the show, I can't say, but they show up in Kung Fu movies all the time.

[Lord Tataraus]

Looks good levi, the bamboo spear made a cameo appearance in Sokka's Master when Sokka was in the weapon's shop trying out different weapons.

I'd say there is only one type of katana (for simplicity's sake) and it would deal the same damage as a longsword. Also remember that it is a piercing weapon primarily while it does excel at slashing, piercing is much more effective against armors.

[Thantos]

I got to go to bed right now but tomarrow I will put up what I have for a slashing master. I don't know how it will fit but I think it is cool so far.

[levi]

I just realized I forgot one weapon in the chart, which lead to some of it being a little off. As I was fixing that, I remembered that the DnD weapon categories don't really line up very well with traditional Japanese sword categories.

DnD swords have six categories (dagger, short, long, bastard, great, full). Japanese blades are categoriezed in various ways, but the size categories used by the average westerner are only four: Tanto, Wakizashi, Katana, and Odachi (or Nodachi, a similar, but different weapon).

The Katana is almost always (Hollywood notwithstanding) weilded two handed, so I belive it should be the Greatsword equvilant. On the other tentacle, one of the remaining Kenjusu Ryus does teach the one handed style and the image is very popular. So I'm not sure what's the best way to line them up.

In traditional Japanese blade classification, they are split up by length, mesured in shaku, a unit approximately one foot in length. A blade less than one shaku is considered a tanto ("knife"). A blade one to two shaku in length is considered a shoto ("short sword"). A blade longer than two shaku is considered a daito ("long sword").

Katana are usually in the range of 2.3 shaku (70cm) to 2.45 shaku (74cm). Katana smaller than 2 shaku are considered chisa katana. Wakizashi are even shorter and average 1.65 shaku (50cm). Anything over 3 shaku is considered an [i]odachi[i].

As complex as all that is, that's really only the tip of the iceburg. I haven't even gotten into the types of tachi and other such things. (Like the use of o- ("long") and ko- ("short").

Honestly, as there are a wide variety of curved blades used the world over that in DnD would use the same stats as those in my chart, I've given up on trying to name them. Of course, that does make it hard to use in a game.

Perhaps, rules wise, one could just use the names: Knife, Short Saber, Long Saber, Bastard Saber, Great Saber, and Full Saber. Pretty generic and not very historical, but so are the DnD names for the straight double bladed swords. I just don't know. How's this:

{table=head]Japanese | European | Category | Profiecny
Tanto | Dagger | Light | Simple
Wakizashi | Short Sword | Light | Martial
Owakizashi | Long Sword | One Handed | Martial
Chisa Katana | Bastard Sword | One Handed | Exotic
Katana | Great Sword | Two Handed | Martial
Odachi | Full Blade | Two Handed | Exotic
[/table]

I don't know whether that should go "kowakizashi" then "wakizashi" or "owakizashi" then "owakizashi".

I suppose the full blade category could be dropped then it could go "tanto", "wakizashi", "chisa katana", "katana", "odachi". However, I don't really like that idea because Odachi are large and really seem to be an exotic weapon to me.

As for peircing weapons being better against armor, in reality that is a valid point, but in DnD there isn't really any mechanism for that. As far as I'm conserned, all swords (curved or straight) should do "Piercing or Slashing". It has very little game effect and bothering to keep track of exactly what sort of so-called "long sword" a character has to decide what damage category it can do is more work than it's worth.

[Lakoda]

So...is anyone up to the task of making weapon type styles? Or were they just suggestions for me to do so? I might take on the task at some point, but I'm a little worn out right now, so if some one starts some up I'll help as much as I can.

I have ideas for abilities (for the different styles) that I was going to start putting together this week and try and finalize over the weekend - eta Monday morning. If you all like what you see use it in part or whole. I'm really bad with naming abilities and such so they will be practical names until someone fluffs them.