|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Mark Seifter wrote:
Awesome, but as you say, there has been controversy about which ki abilities the Sensei can pass to the party and which can't.
Perhaps it is a faq worth topic? (I personally err on the side that Sensei can share all ki abilities, but that is because I feel the Sensei deserves that little coolness factor at that level)
A quick question, with the new faq about Dragon Style/Ferocity, how does dragon ferocity interact with Horn of the Criosphinx? Would it add 1/2 str to the existing now 2x Str?
You can wield a greatsword, did you know? Sure everyone calls it a Quaterstaff and it only does 1d6 damage, but wield it two handed and guess what, strength and a half (+3 for a 14 strength, +6 for an 18 strength).
Then cast Shillelagh, and suddenly its a +1 weapon, with a base damage of 2d6. (2d6+7 for those of you keeping track at home).
And if you happened to take the growth domain, well, the sky is the limit here (3d6 + 8 damage). Maybe splash for power attack? (3d6 + 11 damage)
All possible at 1st level.
Edit: Ah, sorry, just saw that you wanted to control. Carry on.
As I mentioned before as to which part of this conversation held my interest, *and mostly because I'm not understanding the exchange between the two of you, never was great at mathematic progression* are you guys saying that a colossal 20th level monk won't get 12d8 damage on his unarmed strikes?
Mark Seifter wrote:
As to your question, it is an interesting question to be sure. In my games, I would say that the weapon bonuses still don't apply, but then again, I've been on the receiving side of a giant monster's grapples enough times to know that the status quo is already on the grappler's side enough that I wouldn't want to push it even more in that direction (for instance, my poor brawler in the playtest for my two Occult Adventures classes has been grappled successfully numerous times despite my having spend significant character resources on bonuses to prevent grapples). If I didn't see the status quo in that way, your question is close enough to a toss-up for me that I could have seen myself answering...
I'd agree, except that it is mostly PC grapplers that have access to the tactics I mentioned above (enhancement bonuses/weapon focus and other gear based forms of grappling enhancement via weapon bonuses). It would, for example, have helped shore up your Ti's grapple check quite nicely, while it probably wouldn't have applied for a T-Rex attacking the party, say.
Query I had recently come up. Per the Paizo Blog only combat maneuvers directly involving weapons (normally trip, disarm and sunder) are allowed to add weapon bonuses (enchancements e.t.c.) to the maneuver attempt.
Grapple is not normally one of these maneuvers, but what about weapons (and natural weapons) that patently are involved in the grappling process, that is, weapons like the Mancatcher and a T-Rex's bite with the Grab special quality. Would, for example, weapon focus and enhancement bonuses on these weapons add to the maneuver itself?
Many thanks for your and the PDT's continued hard work, we, the players and DMs might not always agree with what you decide, but we are always thankful for your effort.
Note: The tentacle attacks of a giant lake octopus are its secondary natural attacks. (Its bite is the primary natrual attack)
Sure, you get 8 of them, and you get to do your monk unarmed damage with them (with feral combat training), but they are all at -2 to hit and 1/2 strength to damage.
I personally do not appreciate the accusation that you leveled there against me. Calling someone's ideas cheesy when they are based on a strict reading of the rules is quite insulting. You wouldn't want me to name you a Grognard Neckbeard would you? (Hypothetically of course :P)
What is one build's corner case is another build's bread and butter. Personally I like to refer to the RAW as much as possible.
Hey, Base Warpriest I'm inclined to agree with you. But Sacred Fist? I think the damage output is at least even, if not better (Inquisitor might still edge out in non-combat situations).
NOOooooooOOO!!! MY BUILD IS RUINED! Ruined I say!
No not really, the Monk/Sacred Fist is still the most powerful iteration of the Unarmed style fighter-ish. It was a nice bonus, but now that it is settled, most DMs won't take as much umbrage when it is brought to their table.
I do feel sorry for all the Inquisitors though, but judging from how people were constantly comparing them favorably in role to the Warpriest, they needed to be taken down a peg.
Regular Monk/Druid - 12d8 Unarmed Strike
Vital Striking Monk Druid - 48d8 Unarmed Strike
Conqueror Ooze - 14d8 Unarmed Strike (Well Slam, but close enough with feral combat training)
Vital Striking Conqueror Ooze - 56d8 Unarmed Strike
Vital Striking, Furious Finish Conqueror Ooze with fatigue Immunity - 448 damage with change (static mods which I haven't put in, because, why, at this point.)
*RAW it works because the growth domain ability is a Su ability and thus stacks with beast shape polymorph spell ability* Enlarged Vital Striking, Furious Finish Conqueror Ooze with fatigue Immunity - 672 damage and change.
Of course this is assuming only one source of actual size increase and one source of *as if they were x sizes larger*, which is not RAW, but really, if you can size increases like that, it isn't sporting anymore.
I think it would apply, but only to the initial check made to grapple the target when you use your grab ability. After that I don't think the bonus would apply any longer, unless you take the -20 (effectively -18 due to GMF) penalty to grapple for using on the body part with the grab ability (bite in your case).
Grab doesn't just stop working after the initial grapple:
Creatures with the grab special attack receive a +4 bonus on combat maneuver checks made to start and maintain a grapple.
Every grapple check made in a grapple (i.e. to maintain the grapple) benefits from grab.
Disarm, sunder, and trip are normally the only kinds of combat maneuvers in which you’re actually using a weapon (natural weapons and unarmed strikes are considered weapons for this purpose) to perform the maneuver, and therefore the weapon’s bonuses (enhancement bonuses, feats such as Weapon Focus, fighter weapon training, and so on) apply to the roll.
I don't think it would. Combat maneuvers which use a weapon (disarm, sunder and trip) apply all applicable weapon bonuses (enhancement bonus of the weapon, feat bonuses, etc.) to the CMB check, but other maneuvers do not. Since it is not mentioned in this category, your enhancement bonus to attack rolls is not applied to grapple checks. It probably should be though. Ask your GM.
For other maneuvers, either you’re not using a weapon at all, or the weapon is incidental to making the maneuver and its bonuses shouldn’t make you better at attempting the maneuver. For example, just because you have a +5 greatsword doesn’t mean it gives you a +5 bonus on dirty trick checks (Pathfinder RPG Advanced Player’s Guide 320), and just because you have a +5 dagger doesn’t mean it gives you a +5 bonus on grapple checks. Of course, the GM is free to rule that in certain circumstances, a creature can apply weapon bonuses for these maneuvers, such as when using a sap in a dirty trick maneuver to hit an opponent in a sensitive spot.
So it is DM fiat as to whether a weapon is involved in a combat maneuver and therefore should benefit? Fair enough, I agree with what you said, Runs.
Fortunately, I am the DM :)
Here's a secret I've learned, EVERYBODY likes to feel powerful, NOBODY likes to feel like they are being carried.
So when you create characters for your next game, help others make optimal choices and powerful characters. Then when you play one, you're just one of the guys/gals.
This is how I've sneaked my most optimal builds into play, really.
Can't Brawlers, y'know, just use unarmed strikes like the rest of us? Too good for the sweet science eh?
Fair enough, though I notice that you haven't voted yet.
Yeah, you missed a choice... How about when you've never used it, even when it was the theorycrafter's favorite?
I'm not sure how that tells me much about how the use has changed, "I never used it before, and now that its been nerf, I DEFINITELY don't use it" isn't a demographic I feel contributes to a complete picture, but am I mistaken there?
So I'm just curious if Paizo's nerf of Crane Style made it less popular in general play. I think most DMs wanted to see it not as good, but still a viable choice, but it may be the case that nobody uses it anymore because of better choices out there.
So favorite this post if you still include it in your builds as a matter of course.
How does pummeling charge and janni rush interact with each other? plus master of many styles and pummeling charge
As far as I am aware, a charging monk with pummeling strike will double all his damage dice from every attack (since all of them are attacks made while charging) with janni rush.
I am aware that there is a faq for mounted combat/spirited charge, but with all my research, I have not seen any indication that it has anything to do with non-mounted combat.
Ah here is the faq:
As to MoMS qualifying for Pummeling charge at 2nd level, that is also legit, but they give up quite a bit for it, I feel.
I'd say yes. improved natural attack is an exceptionally strong jaw, an exceptionally large set of claws. You've physically, mundanely changed the natural weapon in question. Strongjaw magically imbues the claw/bite/talon with with MORE POWER!
My personal take is that you get one actual size increase and one "as if you were" size increase, and that's that.
Improved natural attack is obviously dealing damage "as if you were" one size larger, so it wouldn't stack with Strong Jaw. It would stack, quite handily, with animal growth.
As an aside: This, this (24d8 damage on a natural attack!!!) is entirely all right for you, but 4 extra AC from Wis is munchkin madness?
I do not comprehend at all how your mind works, BNW.
So there is no reason to go chasing after dragon style if it doesn't work RAW, just pick up dragon style and Horn of the Criosphinx.
Now when you charge, by RAW, all your attacks from pummeling style do 2.5x strength bonus (due to dragon ferocity and Horn of the Criosphinx, dragon style itself is completely ignored).
Evil summons don't have as many cures though, if that is what you are gunning for. The Leonal on the other hand has that 1/day heal (which each summoning should net you a new one of) and has lay on hands for 7d6 9 times per day.
Melee damage isn't great (ironically for the giant anthropomorphic lion) I admit, but at will 10d6 fireballs makes up for a fair bit in my opinion.
On the subject of Horn of the Criosphinx, well, since I am partial to the 2 monk dip, I took quicken blessing as my 13th level feat, and Horn of the Criosphinx as my 11th, but yes, you are broadly correct about the higher requirements for it.
When I saw that Andrew Christian had chosen this as his hill that he wanted to die on, I basically lost all interest in the conversation.
Either I'm right, and he has lost all that time and effort he invested into it. (and if time and effort made one right, Andrew would be right 10 times over in this thread)
Or he is right, in which case we get a lot of new rules to clarify things (because frack me, if that isn't a can of wriggly worms, ability typed bonuses).
Either way, win win, and I have expended as little of my valuable (heh) posting time and effort as possible.
Very much liking the guide so far, so well done! Just a couple of points for possible inclusion:
1. Horn of the Criosphinx is a winner of a feat for the Sacred fist, double your strength to damage while pummeling charge (for all attacks too) is a bit hard to pass up.
2. As to the ring of summoning affinity, I am partial to the Agathion one (especially since it adds a good creature to the 8th level Summon monster list, the Leonal). With Quicken blessing at high levels, it is basically a swift action heal + a combat beatstick (leonals can cast heal, and it is a free action to say, "Please, Old Chap, cast that heal on me")
Oh, also a Samsaran Sacred Fist with the Strong Jaw spell can easily reach 8d8 unarmed damage at lvl 15 with a casting of Righteous Might. I know people are more fond of static mods, but 8d8 damage is a non-insignificant amount (especially since you don't have to sacrifice your static mods to get it, power attack, dragon style and horn of the criosphinx means that you are doing a good 30+ static damage per hit).
A couple of suggestions:
Crusader's Flurry is good for a Sacred fist of Irori if he wants to be more wis focused (of course you can also work on your Strength and do all the other tricks, you're just more AC focused rather than damaged focused). Unfortunately as pointed out in the other thread, Irori has quite crap domains for blessing, ah well.
Samsarans can raid the Ranger's spell list with Mystic Past Life and pick up a bunch of useful spells:
Lead Blades (1st)
As opposed to the Destruction blessing which is +10 to damage? For 1 minute per use (So if you have foreknowledge, it is almost guaranteed for a whole combat instead of a single round?)?
I dunno, I can do math too, and I think Destruction is much better.
Strength is kind of a crap blessing for the sacred fist because the minor gives you an enhancement bonus to your attacks and damage (which incidentally is the most prevalent bonus source and won't stack with basically everything), and the major gives you the ability to ignore armor movement penalties (that full plate you're not wearing as a sacred fist is really hampering you).
Personally Alignment, Destruction, Travel, Luck and Trickery are the winners for me, runner up for Repose if you can find a way to put foes to sleep (quicken blessing and conductive amulet of mighty fist perhaps).
Kudos for the Sacred Fist though, thats what I've been wanting since 3.5 ended. My thanks.
The rules tell you what you can do, not what you can't do.
You seem to be ignoring this. Everything else is fluff text, unless it says it does something mechanical. No damage or no save or die effect? It doesn't do these things.
RAW means taking the rules as written, not extrapolating some kind of "logical extreme" based on the flavor text.
Oh BNW, what are you going to do if they rule, eventually, that double dipping is totes legal? :P
Don't get me wrong, if they rule against me, I'm going to do what I've always done*.
*Curl up into a foetal position and cry while bingeing on a tub of ice-cream and cry-whinging to Merisiel that nobody understands me.