Zalsus

Katz's page

229 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 229 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bruno Mares wrote:

The brawler just seems like a very, very bad redesign of the monk's martial artist archetype of the Ultimate Combat with feats. Maybe also a bad redesign of the fighter brawler and/or unarmed fighter archetypes.

Is this class really need?!?

Looking at the thread, common opinion is that it's a very, very good redesign of the brawler fighter and martial artist monk. And maybe not needed, but plenty of people seem to WANT it.


Arakhor wrote:
For what it's worth, I like the name Brawler, but I could settle with Pugilist, as that's basically what it is.

I like the name, too; I think it fits the class nicely. The issue is there's ALREADY an unarmed combatant fighter archetype called the Brawler (And not sure Pugilist would work; there's a Brutal Pugilist barbarian)

Bruiser would fit, and as far as I'm aware, isn't yet taken


I can see the Dragon Ferocity+Power Attack combination going either way. However, I also think it should be moved to its own thread; the discussion concerns Monks, Brawlers, as well as Unarmed or Brawler Fighters, and only discussing it in the Brawler Class thread will prevent people not concerned with the playtest from discussing it, as well as making it potentially take more time for the people who work on rules errata from seeing it. At the same time, it clogs up this thread, which would be better served discussing Brawler-specific rules interactions, discussing thing sfound through reading, theorycrafting, and playtest.

On the main topic, I have two things to add: Firstly, I think Flurry shouldn't be part of the class's abilities, I would prefer something closer to the Master of Many Styles' abilities, as others have stated. Second, I think the class should have a different name, to avoid confusion, especially since the Fighter's Brawler archetype is based around similar concepts (unarmed\close-to-unarmed combat with full BAB)


Knight_Druid wrote:

I have been waiting for a fighter that uses only hands, but doesn't have the eastern bent of the monk. Look at it this way:

Brawler = boxer, mix-martial artist, etc...

Monk = karate, kung-fu, akido, etc...

They are both VERY different in their discipline and design, but achieve the same goal; a front-line fighter that uses their body as a weapon.

I thought that the monk-is-fine crowd has already established front-line fighting isn't the monk's purpose


From the little description of it I've seen, it sounds like they're focusing on the animal companion much more than the ranger does, and possibly even more than the druid does...while also focusing on weapon combat more than the druid does.


Cheapy wrote:
ciretose wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
I was wondering when this thread would be created.

Why wait to see the class before you complain.

It isn't like most of these threads aren't based of untested assumptions anyway...

The crazy thing is that this is almost 100 posts in under 12 hours and the playtest isn't even out! Imagine the flurry when it does come out.

The Monk can use flurry of blows...while the brawler evidently has flurry of posts ;)


Also, I think it bears repeating that the Fighter's bonus feats don't let him spend more feats on out-of-combat prowess, but instead give him a chance of being able to invest in the feat chains he requires to be useful in combat. Meanwhile, the Ranger can laugh at feat requirements, and the Paladin, Gunslinger, and Barbarian can operate with less feat investment.


Why does it seem inherently bad to flip through the book, see a class, and decide you want to play it?


Pandora's wrote:
Katz wrote:
I think I have to agree with most of your post. I'd like to mention why I, as a player, might be more forward with WHAT my character is, rather than WHO; because the WHAT is the part that's easiest to create. Perhaps your players are still trying to decide the WHO, while they know what sort of character they'd like to make.
It's also much easier to communicate, and implies the mechanical foundation of your character. Upthread where I describe an oddball character of mine, it took a sentence to say what race it was. It took 3 paragraphs to explain her personality and goals, and I made no mention of combat capabilities besides class. If I tell you I'm playing Ifrit fire school wizard, you have a vague picture of my character's abilities. Same with a halfling cavalier. Telling you I'm playing a snooty orphan raised by a noble family in Cheliax who really is a kind, fun-loving person but was repressed by society doesn't convey the same information. Gender-race-class levels is a statblock standard for a reason.

There's the rest of what I wanted to say, but couldn't quite word together! :D


I'm curious, would it be possible to add permament magical enhancements to improvised weapons?


Lemmy, how would your build change if the monk was a Martial Artist with Mantis Style? I'm curious if that would help make the monk's stunning fist more viable


ciretose wrote:

Because you said something that only works 25% of the time isn't particularly useful.

At absolute best, crits work less than 25% of the time.

If using stunning fist had an opportunity cost, you might have a point.

It doesn't.

Stunning fist has limited uses per day, if the attack misses you waste that use, and even if it hits it gives a save to ignore the effects, which target's fortitude save (a very common high save). And to keep the DC up requires certain archetypes, certain styles, and/or having a high wisdom on a MAD class (getting that high wisdom might not be possible on lower point-buys, though higher point-buys make that easier). I'm not necessarily in the 'Stunning Fist is useless' camp, I'm just saying that it's not really comparable to crits, at least at lower levels or if you have non-monk levels.


Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:
iammercy wrote:

Eidolon's.

However. "While fused with his eidolon, the synthesist can use all of his own abilities and gear, except for his armor."

So for example. If the character has levels of monk the Fast Movement would still apply. As would any other ability or gear, with the exception of any ability that is on his armor.

Hmm interesting. So Synthesist Summoner/Dragon Disciple? The Eidolon would get all the stat bonuses as well?

I doubt that one, since the summoner's physical stats are replaces, and Dragon Disciple would effect the summoner, not the eidolon


My friend is wondering, when the Synthesist Summoner has his Eidolon out, does the Summoner use his movement speed, or his Eidolon's?


My half-orc Gunslinger based off of Django (from the original movie, not the new one)

My party's cavalier's player facepalmed and then laughed for five minutes when I opened my coffin :D


In my experience, there are ways to make Gunslinger work without Quick Clear. The more concerning issue is that both Buccaneer and Mysterious Stranger removes your Gun Training feature that adds quite a bit of damage (although you could overcome that with feats such as Arcane Strike)

Honestly, depending on stat allocation, because the Gunslinger can dump strength lower (he only needs strength for his equipment) you can probably afford to have decent dex, wisdom, and charisma, depending on how you're allocating stats (if it's point buy, you can easily check out your options; if you're rolling, you'd have to see if you can get rolls that would work.

IMO, Gunslingers have three primary options; one level, five level, or thirteen (for Pistolero/Musket Master). One level gets you quick clear (unless your archetype loses it), grit points, a few deeds, firearm proficiency, 4+int skill points, full BAB, and good hit die; five levels gets you gun training to add dex to your damage rolls; thirteen in those two archetypes removes misfire chance.

EDIT: just noticed this deed:

Focused Aim:
Focused Aim (Ex)

At 1st level, as a swift action, the mysterious stranger can spend 1 grit point to gain a bonus on all firearm damage rolls equal to her Charisma modifier (minimum 1) with all firearm attacks she makes until the end of her turn. At 7th level, when she uses the dead shot deed, she multiplies this bonus by the number of hits she made while rolling the Dead Shot attack.

This deed replaces the quick clear deed.

It removes Arcane Strike as an option, but potentially helps you keep your damage closer to on-par with a gunslinger with gun training. You'd need extra grit points to use it often, but you might not even need much of the damage since you've also got performance and spells to contribute to battles instead of just damage


Fastmover wrote:
Could a Monk of the Empty Hand be capable of using guns as a Flurry weapon even if it had first take pre-reqs to use the gun, and use the gun as a club or light hammer?

I would say yes, though as a quarterstaff (for two-handed) or club (for one-handed) based on the way the MotEH is written, though YMMV


1. Could I use Perfect Strike to roll multiple times in a Combat Maneuver attempt? (This is in regards to maneuvers that use an attack action)

Perfect Strike:
You must declare that you are using this feat before you make your attack roll (thus a failed attack roll ruins the attempt). You must use one of the following weapons to make the attack: kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, and siangham. You can roll your attack roll twice and take the higher result. If one of these rolls is a critical threat, the other roll is used as your confirmation roll (your choice if they are both critical threats). You may attempt a perfect attack once per day for every four levels you have attained (but see Special), and no more than once per round.

Combat Maneuvers:
While many combat maneuvers can be performed as part of an attack action, full-attack action, or attack of opportunity (in place of a melee attack), others require a specific action.

2. With the Maneuver Master archetype, how do the penalties on Flurry of Maneuvers work? Are they -2/-5/-12, or -12 for all? I found the text a little confusing in this regard

Flurry of Maneuvers:
At 1st level, as part of a full-attack action, a maneuver master can make one additional combat maneuver, regardless of whether the maneuver normally replaces a melee attack or requires a standard action. The maneuver master uses his monk level in place of his base attack bonus to determine his CMB for the bonus maneuvers, though all combat maneuver checks suffer a –2 penalty when using a flurry.

At 8th level, a maneuver master may attempt a second additional combat maneuver, with an additional –3 penalty on combat maneuver checks.

At 15th level, a maneuver master may attempt a third additional combat maneuver, with an additional –7 penalty on combat maneuver checks.


Undone wrote:

Would it still be overpowered without a crit multiplier?

Quote:
You could houserule that keen and improved crit stacks. I do.
This is far more broken than what I'm suggesting.

It would still be overpowered, because crit feats activate based on critical confirmation, not critical multiplier

And how would that be far more broken? If you rule they stack multiplicative, then they'd stack to give an 8-20 crit range, using a weapon enhancement AND a feat, while your weapon would grant 8-20 range with weapon enhancement OR a feat. If you rule they stack additionally, then the crit range would be 12-20, using a feat and enhancement.


Trogdar wrote:

wouldn't something like a MoMS 4/Brawler X be the best route to take due to the feat that allows for the monks unarmed damage dice to progress?

You get quite a bit out of four levels of monk. The trade off is what? Four hit points and one bab? seems like a fair trade for the saves and the style feats early.

I think the standard setup for that is MoMS 2/Brawler X to get the style feats, but your style could work to keep some of the larger unarmed strike damage dice in addition to the brawler's large damage bonuses.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The 3.5 Warlock, and that other class that had an at-will breath weapon (Dragon Adept or something like that, maybe?) The only issue I had was that they fell off a bit in later-game due to lack of iterative, but the at-will magical/supernatural attack thing is something I really like.


Nicos wrote:
Justin Rocket wrote:
MrSin wrote:
Justin Rocket wrote:
I found the machinesmith confusing.
Some classes don't make sense on your first or second read, even from Core/APG. A lot of times by going to the forums on paizo or whatever company made the class you can find a clarification. I know the magus confused me when I first read it and for the first year or so I never had to deal with one so I never actually learned how the magus worked. Its one of my favorite classes atm, but at first I thought it was ridiculous and confusing and... yeah.
A class shouldn't require going to the forum to make sense of it.
Summoners?

To be fair, Summoners are a source of criticism and debate on these forums (though less so in recent months) in large part due to the fact that it's that difficult to make sense of.


Yes


I've seen very little 3pp hate, most people are happy to recommend 3pp products. However, due to the nature of it, there can be a lot of 3pp stuff that's imbalanced or poorly thought out. Also, if you're going to quote mplindustries, could you link to where they posted that? Without context, it's hard to tell if it's meant to be sarcastic, snarky, mean, kind-hearted, etc.


TheInnsmouthLooker wrote:
The Oracle's Curse is based on your Oracle level, not total character level so the immunity to fatigue is out right away.

Oracle's Curse actually does scale off of non-oracle levels.


What if he doesn't want to two-weapon fight with whips?


Say I was going to go with an undine sorcerer for this, are there any feats (other than the improved/greater combat maneuver feats) or class dips that would help?


Would it be possible to make an Undine caster that used the Hydraulic Maneuver feat to perform combat maneuvers, and have it be a viable character?


My advice? Maybe build out a few builds at level ten (seems to be the standard) comparing fighters and monks in damage, survivability, and combat maneuvers. Twenty point buy. Human, if we want to compare just classes, and not what the classes can do with racial abilities.


Alright, thanks for the help, guys!


I've seen people say that you can deal sneak attack damage using rays, without the capstone ability of the Arcane Trickster. Is there anything that says that in the rules?


bump


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Quote:
Monks of the empty hand are proficient with the shuriken only. A monk of the empty hand treats normal weapons as improvised weapons with the following equivalencies (substituting all of their statistics for the listed weapon): a light weapon functions as a light hammer, a one-handed weapon functions as a club, and a Two-handed weapon functions as a quarterstaff.

The quoted text is from the Monk of the Empty Hand's Weapon Proficiencies. I'm curious how this interacts with multiclassing; if a MotEH has weapon proficiencies from another class, or gains levels in a class later that gives weapon proficiencies, what happens? Is he still stuck only able to use them as improvised weapons? Is he able to choose between using weapons properly, and as improvised weapons? Would new proficiencies replace the improvised weapons?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've had a few character concepts I really liked.

-A half-orc Gunslinger based off the original Django film (Was flipping through Ultimate Equipment finding gear for a different character, saw the coffin, made my decision, heh)
-A frying pan-wielding wandering 'chef' who worked as a bounty hunter (Monk of the Empty Hand)
-A qingong Hungry Ghost Sensei who was an old man who helped people with advice, and through around burning rays (In retrospect, it was basically Uncle Iroh, lol)

I like optimizing. But I don't powergame--I simply want to make my concept workable. And sometimes my concepts are based off of game mechanics (like seeing the Qinggong Monk's cool ki spell-like abilities). Or sometimes I plan my character a couple levels ahead in mechanics. Both of which are things seen as heresy by the 'roleplayers' in my group.

A lot of the viewpoints on this matter, on both sides, are based on perspective. Some people come onto these boards and see what they think is people powergaming and min-maxing. It's often people saying 'how do I make this concept work,' but not always, and it doesn't always seem like it. And that makes some people think everybody here is a powergamer, even when it's often that people come to these boards with the parts that are often easily assisted, i.e. the mechanics.

Some people here have had problems with what they see as 'powergamers' (sometimes they are, sometimes it's just an 'average' optimization in a very unoptimized party, sometimes it's other issues). Other people, like me, have had plenty of problems with 'roleplayers.' Both sides have the same issue--the extremes can make the game unfun--but it's important to note that not everybody is part of the extreme. Powergamers can know the ins and outs of the system by heart and know the most optimal feats and know how to break the game, while not doing so (in fact, plenty of times where I see people truly, intentionally breaking the game, it's for the fun of finding humourous loopholes, like Pun Pun, or the Sohei Monk/Gunslinger/Weapon Master Fighter who can flurry with a firearm at range and add full strength and dexterity to the attacks). And roleplayers can come up with fun characters without caring about optimization, and focus on noncombat roleplay encounters, and have fun with interesting characters, without being snob jerks who yell at you for wanting to play a Duskblade in 3.5 because only powergamers play the class, and it's impossible to roleplay. Or call you a powergamer for selling a +1 longsword, rather than keeping and using it, because you used it in an encounter as an emergency and you don't have proficiency. Or call you a powergamer for not putting your one skill point for the level in swim, when you swam across a river once during that level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A half-orc gunslinger who wields a musket and carries his weapons and gear around in coffin.

Yes, it's fantasy-Django =P


slade867 wrote:
mplindustries wrote:
Marthkus wrote:

Hmm encounter where I can't prebuff spells that are not 10min/lvl or 1hour/level

Hmmmmm, I believe all of them. I may have had a handful of encounter EVER that I could precast a 1 round/lvl buff.

Do you realize that this is extremely a-typical? I can count on one hand the number of times I didn't have at least a round's worth of warning about an upcoming fight.

Is your game just an endless string of ambushes? Does nobody in your party scout or use divination magic or even just have decent perception scores?

Combine this with you talking in another thread about how you have 6 or 8 or some other high number of encounters every day, and I think it's clear that you are playing a very different game than the one that is written in the books, and that is why your perception of power here are skewed.

Keep in mind, I also play a game very different from the one in the books, but I still understand what the game I'm not playing is like (in fact, it is that understanding that led me to deviate so greatly), so when I discuss things on the forum, I use the common ground of the books, not my personal game with all my houserules and stylistic changes.

In ALL the games I play, you see an enemy, they see you, roll initiative. Not you see an enemy, they see you, both sides have a free round, roll initiative.

That's not how warning works. Using perception, scouting, and/or divination, you see enemy, they don't see you, you spend a bit of time getting ready and attack them.


Okay, how does this look?

(Race undecided)
Paladin 1/Master of Many Styles 1

Strength: 16
Dexterity: 10
Constitution: 14
Intelligence: 10
Wisdom: 10
Charisma: 14
(I don't really like dump stats)

Feats: Boar Style (from Master of Many Styles) and Two-Weapon Fighting
Skills: 2 ranks Knowledge Religion, Intimidate, Diplomacy, 1 rank Sense Motive (Intimidate is useful for the Boar Style chain's demoralize abilities, flavouring it as intimidating the enemy through the power of righteous fury)

Rather than use wisdom and dexterity for AC, I'm planning on using armour, to help reduce MAD.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I remember somebody doing an extremely similar thing on here, they even had a blog for it. Might want to search for their thread, see if he can give any help for how to run it. I remember it being a really good success for him, though!

Edit: paizo.com/threads/rzs2o4g4?Starting-a-middleschool-Pathfinder-club found it


Rynjin wrote:

Irori is pretty cool. Stereotypical Monk guy, doesn't really care what his followers do as long as they follow the path of self perfection.

Achaekek is neat. Don't really get a cooler title than "Assassin of the gods". Something about his single-minded efficiency I find very well suited for Lawful Evil characters in general. My last Monk was a worshiper of both him AND Irori and I was amazed at how little conflict there was between the two ideologies. They just meshed together very well.

Also, I don't think anyone can NOT like Cayden Cailean. Coolest god in most mythologies I've read.

His backstory is like the Hangover if the Hangover was actually interesting and had a genuinely funny/WTF ending.

Katz wrote:
Zon-Kuthon. Because I really like the spiked chain, and his related prestige class has really neat flavour.

You mean the Pain Taster? I LOVE the Pain Taster.

Never have figured out how any PC is supposed to even begin to qualify for it, which makes me sad.

Actually I was referring to: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/prestige-classes/other-paizo/s-z/umbral-cou rt-agent since I think worshipping Zon-Kuthon was a prerequisite in the Paths of Prestige book


Interesting guide, definitely helping me lean towards Champion of Irori. Also, I just found out the barbarian is going to be a True Primitive Gnome...and the player has decided his character doesn't know common. It's looking like I might accidentally support the viewpoint of some people in my group that Monks are the strongest class in the game...


My friend is running a game tomorrow, starting at level 2, 20-point buy, all books allowed. I've decided I want to make a hand-to-hand combatant (not necessarily monk). My current idea is Paladin 1/Master of Many Styles 1, eventually leading into Champion of Irori. Also considering using a fighter, but the paladin/champion seemed like a good way to add in something to do in combat other than just attacking (even if all something like Smite is is adding damage to attacks :P). However, I'm also considering Maneuver Master or something, because the idea of a fast monk darting around the battlefield disabling enemies does seem fun. I spoke to the GM, and he ruled that gauntlets and brass knuckles would retain Monk unarmed strike damage. The other party members are a barbarian, and a third undecided character (though he tends to play spellcasters)

a. With the Champion of Irori, are there any significant pitfalls? Any particular problems? (other than MAD, which I'm planning on limiting somewhat by using armour so I can have a lower Wisdom)
b. What combat maneuvers remain viable lategame?
c. Does anybody else have suggestions that would match the idea of either a heavily-armoured hand-to-hand combatant, or a fast, maneuver-using martial artist?


Zon-Kuthon. Because I really like the spiked chain, and his related prestige class has really neat flavour.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd like to make a quick response to the 'Crossbows are simple weapons, of COURSE they're inferior to martial weapons' argument: following that logic, most exotic weapons should be superior to martial weapons. However, there doesn't seem to be too much of a noticeable difference between them.


Cheapy wrote:
Well, that's why you become immune to fatigue. Which, last I recalled, the boards agreed would still provide immunity to that ability.
Furious Finish wrote:
While raging, when you use the Vital Strike feat, you can choose not to roll your damage dice and instead deal damage equal to the maximum roll possible on those damage dice. If you do, your rage immediately ends, and you are fatigued (even if you would not normally be).

Seems like the feat says you'd still be fatigued even if immune...I'm not sure though. The text seems clear, but there is a bit of room there for immunity stopping it.


Altus Lucrim wrote:
Sub Par? SUB PAR?!!! RAWR!!!! Just because I'm a Bonus giving support Character I'm SUB PAR!!!! NAY! This Character shall be AWESOME at giving bonuses to his allies! And sub-par in the damage department.... However With the option of Sensei and Strategist, I am considering a Dwarf for this racially because of the Bonuses to Con and Wisdom, I could easily pop for an 18 in both, because I dont really need Dexterity any more, and I do not need Strength, or Intelligence really

I think by 'sub-par' he meant you were going to have a slightly lesser version of the bard's support abilities.


The Brawler's version of weapon training is neat, as is his ability to disrupt nearby allies. Inquisitor Bane is cool. Alchemist Mutagens are cool, too.


Thinking Hexes are one use per day. An Evil character MUST be pure, unsubtle satanic evil. A character/creature can only have one primary natural weapon. The Half Elf Summoner favoured class bonus means you add an amount of Evolution Points equal to 1/4 of your Eidolon's current Evolution Points. Monks are one of the strongest classes in the game (Let's not get into this here, there are other threads for that). The only right way to play the game is by roleplaying, and that means you can't do anything remotely optimized. Some classes in the game are only used by powergaming min-maxing munchkins, and are incapable of being used for roleplay. A Cavalier dipping Cleric is min-maxing and powergaming. A Cleric MUST have a diety, simply having extreme devotion to a cause represented by a Domain is not enough. A Cleric MUST be a priest.


27 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can one use elemental fist with a weapon? I see nothing saying one can't in the feat's description, but the Improved Unarmed Strike requirement and the name seem to imply it's for unarmed strikes only.


ShadowcatX wrote:

I believe regeneration fails in the event of death spells. That is why the tarrasque has that clause.

So can you kill the Tarrasque? Sure. For 3 rounds. That's long enough for a couple teleports.

His reasoning was that a spellcaster could use Animate Dead to bring it back within those three rounds, removing its regeneration.


Regeneration Universal Monster Rules http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/rules-for-monsters/universal-monster-rules #TOC-Regeneration-Ex- wrote:
Creatures with regeneration heal damage at a fixed rate, as with fast healing, but they cannot die as long as their regeneration is still functioning
Tarrasque Regeneration http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/magical-beasts/spawn-of-r ovagug/tarrasque wrote:
If the tarrasque fails a save against an effect that would kill it instantly, it rises from death 3 rounds later with 1 hit point if no further damage is inflicted upon its remains

I'm wondering whether or not the Tarrasque is able to die or not? The universal monster rules state a creature with active regeneration cannot die, but the Tarrasque's rules have the phrase 'rises from death,' and my friend is arguing that that means it is capable of dying despite what the universal monster rules state.

1 to 50 of 229 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>