Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

RPG Superstar 2015

Crushing blow, why full-round


Rules Questions


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Hey guys and girls

We are doing the kingmaker campaign, and I am playing a kind of weird character, a sensei 2/cleric x of Irori
(right now x is 2)

Wisdom is the main attribute (have 18 wis atm), used for attack roll, AC bonus, stunning fist DC and of course spells.

Now, I am very interested in the crushing blow feat. It would allow me to use a stunning fist attempt to give an enemy a pretty large negative AC modifier (-4 AC without buffs, i plan on using owls wisdom) for quite long (1 min vs the 1 round for stun)

But it is kind of a weird feat, since it is defined as a full-round action. My question is why? Would restricting it to once a round not be limiting enough? Shouldn't it be possible to do a crushing blow at the endof a charge?

The writers probably had a good motivation, and I wonder what it was?


Crushing Blow (Combat)

Your focus allows you to smash your enemy’s defenses.

Prerequisites: Improved Unarmed Strike, Stunning Fist.

Benefit: You can make a Stunning Fist attempt as a full-round action. If successful, instead of stunning your target, you reduce the target’s AC by an amount equal to your Wisdom modifier for 1 minute. This penalty does not stack with other penalties applied due to Crushing Blow.

Why? Because Crushing Blow was written as such. That's all.


Stauffie wrote:

Hey guys and girls

We are doing the kingmaker campaign, and I am playing a kind of weird character, a sensei 2/cleric x of Irori
(right now x is 2)

Wisdom is the main attribute (have 18 wis atm), used for attack roll, AC bonus, stunning fist DC and of course spells.

Now, I am very interested in the crushing blow feat. It would allow me to use a stunning fist attempt to give an enemy a pretty large negative AC modifier (-4 AC without buffs, i plan on using owls wisdom) for quite long (1 min vs the 1 round for stun)

But it is kind of a weird feat, since it is defined as a full-round action. My question is why? Would restricting it to once a round not be limiting enough? Shouldn't it be possible to do a crushing blow at the endof a charge?

The writers probably had a good motivation, and I wonder what it was?

Yeah, it does seem off that they gave that issue.

But then again, Scorpian Style (not a style feat), Gorgon's fist have same issue (standard action). Gorgon also has issue that you need to have speed reduced.
Meaning not limited to just 1/rd.

You can combine those above with Flyby Attack though (you get a standard action between mobvement with that feat).

Crushing blow is worse as you can't even move much (standard at least lets you move).
But Cockatrice strike is full rd and requires you dazed, stunned, staggered, flatfooted, etc.

The non limited feats:
Disorienting Blow (you use in place of stunning fist, but each stun aftefr first increases duration...is that if multiple monks use stun?)

You should consider
taking http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/stunning-fist-adept-combat
+1 DC (doesn't stack with Mantis style though)


I am certainly considering mantis style (stunning fist adept seems weak in comparison).

Thanks for the input... but do any of you have an idea why? would it be too strong otherwise? Should I ask my DM to allow charging or doing it as a standard action?

Most other variants of stunning fist seem to be less good than the original. Confused does not give penalties on AC like stunned.
For a usual monk with not very high wisdom, crushing blow would be far less useful than stunning fist... it is just that my weird character might really benefit from it (i wanted to play a sacred fist, a 3.5 prestige class... my DM said he allows that, but at the moment i am in doubt, since pathfinder levels (base class or prestige classes) are on average better than 3.5 levels...perhaps paizo will publish a sacred fist...)


Think of Crushing Blow as a way to help the entire party. Sure, it uses your full attack action, but the benefit is huge if you've all been having trouble hitting the baddie. I'm playing a Monk in a KM campaign right now also. I took Crushing Blow a bit ago and haven't used it a ton but when I have, it was very handy. Not to mention the priceless look on the GM's face when you tell him his baddie's AC just plummets. If you have a sneak attack dealer in your party, it will be a very good idea for them to take Dastardly Finish as soon as they qualify. The two of you will make an unstoppable pair. The key is to get your Wisdom as high as possible to inflate the Stuning Fist DC.

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Rules Questions / Crushing blow, why full-round All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.