Dreamscarred Press introduces the Path of War


Product Discussion

2,051 to 2,100 of 2,138 << first < prev | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | next > last >>

Gambit wrote:

Awesome, got it, thanks for the reply Chris.

While I have your attention, can I maybe get an answer to another question that got skipped over in the massive OotS thread?

Are there any plans in PoW2 to do a Solar Wind/archery focused prestige class in the vein of the the Dragon Fury and Umbral Blade?

Knives and I haven't even sat down to discuss PrC's at this time, we're working on two projects each at the moment, and we've got Nova and Elric working on feats and spells/powers and Zealot archetypes. Here soon though I suspect we'll chat about it and decide on what's going into the mix next!

-X

Paizo Employee Design Manager

ErrantX wrote:
I was confused on the question, for some reason (high on cold medicine I suspect; this cold needs to leave NOW) ***

I feel you on that one. I was at PAX weekend before last and caught a case of what I've been affectionately referring to as "Pan-Asian Liquid Death". I was down for the count almost all of last week and am still running slow this week.

Shadow Lodge

I may have found a typo (or not?)

The Greater Unarmed Strike requires improved unarmed strike, which changes 1d3 damage to 1d6, however this feat reduces the unarmed damage to 1d4 on the (+3 - +6) interval

Shadow Lodge

This has probably already been addressed, but how many books are expected in the PoW series ?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Base unarmed strike damage is 1d3, even with the improved unarmed strike feat. Greater Unarmed Strike is going to net you 1d4, 1d6, and so on per the chart. It never starts you at 1d6.

As far as how many books? Well, honestly, that depends on the fanbase and how well sales do. If the volume gets hot, then more books well be commissioned. Andreas and Jeremy greenlit PoW2 early, and if we're good at what we do and you all like it? The more that get into it will determine if we get a series of softbacks on each class, do an Ultimate PoW or a PoW3. We're in it for the long hall, so you tell us how many books you want by showing you support. Not really trying to sound like a sales pitch, but it's the truth of the matter. :)

-X

Paizo Employee Design Manager

ElementalXX wrote:

I may have found a typo (or not?)

The Greater Unarmed Strike requires improved unarmed strike, which changes 1d3 damage to 1d6, however this feat reduces the unarmed damage to 1d4 on the (+3 - +6) interval

As Chris mentioned, Improved Unarmed Strike does not provide a damage increase. You may be getting the feat crossed with the monk ability.

Shadow Lodge

Ssalarn wrote:
ElementalXX wrote:

I may have found a typo (or not?)

The Greater Unarmed Strike requires improved unarmed strike, which changes 1d3 damage to 1d6, however this feat reduces the unarmed damage to 1d4 on the (+3 - +6) interval

As Chris mentioned, Improved Unarmed Strike does not provide a damage increase. You may be getting the feat crossed with the monk ability.

A yes you are right i got confused with monks ability of the same name. Anyway thanks for the clarification


Well all I gotta say is once the Harbringer comes out and I get a chance to subscribe for PoW2 you'll see how much I wanna support!

Also really want a soft cover of PoW1. It's a real treasure trove of a book and it's amazing how many concepts I can cover with just the 3 base classes. With archetypes I almost can create anything!

Silver Crane on a Warder or Warlord for a Holy Knight.

Primal Fury on a Zweihander Sentinel or Warlord for a savage.

Steel Serpent on a Stalker for a fencer/duelist.

Honestly the only thing missing in my mind is a class or archetype with a pet. So if I have any request in particular for PoW2 it's either a Ranger archetype to get initiation or an archetype for an initiating class to get an animal companion and teamwork oriented features.


What's the difference between the final work in progress PDF and the final release? As in, if I already have the WiP, do I need to buy the final one seperatly?

Paizo Employee Design Manager

1 person marked this as a favorite.
137ben wrote:
What's the difference between the final work in progress PDF and the final release? As in, if I already have the WiP, do I need to buy the final one seperatly?

If you already have purchased the Work in Progress .pdf you do not need to purchase the final .pdf, it is part of your subscription.


Don't know if you've been told this one (I only searched through the last 5 pages for "Sentinel" & "160") but I was looking through the orders and noticed:
"AA Scarlet Sentinel who violates her oath"
I think you intended to have only one A there... Unless the Scarlet Sentinels have a grading system... It was on page 160.

On another note I was watching a random youtube video about honor in martial arts (or rather the lack of it in real life history), and he mentioned a style for bodyguards... This reminded me of the devoted defender from the old 3rd Ed, and I thought to myself "how much support for this type of character is there in POW?"... I quickly skimmed through the styles and while I did see the odd move here and there, no one style seemed to make its self the go to style for protecting someone. There is of course the Sworn Protector whos Shared Counter ability really helps build this character type but no style. Anyway its an Idea for a future style if you haven't already made one... I’m sure many a Wiz/Soc would love to have a cohort with such a style.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DragGon7601 wrote:

On another note I was watching a random youtube video about honor in martial arts (or rather the lack of it in real life history), and he mentioned a style for bodyguards... This reminded me of the devoted defender from the old 3rd Ed, and I thought to myself "how much support for this type of character is there in POW?"... I quickly skimmed through the styles and while I did see the odd move here and there, no one style seemed to make its self the go to style for protecting someone. There is of course the Sworn Protector whos Shared Counter ability really helps build this character type but no style. Anyway its an Idea for a future style if you haven't already made one... I’m sure many a Wiz/Soc would love to have a cohort with such a style.

Iron Tortoise helps here to an extent, but largely you'd want to look at Sworn Protector, Warder as a general class, and then some of PoW 2's upcoming content. "Tanking" in Path of War is generally focused on making yourself a more attractive target than the guy you're protecting and/or creating such problems in the lives of others that you have to be dealt with before they can address everyone else. Cursed Razor, Eternal Guardian, and Shattered Mirror all do that, quite a bit, and Shattered Mirror can be used to keep up with mobile enemies thanks to Doppleganger Dance and Doppleganger Waltz.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DragGon7601 wrote:
On another note I was watching a random youtube video about honor in martial arts (or rather the lack of it in real life history), and he mentioned a style for bodyguards... This reminded me of the devoted defender from the old 3rd Ed, and I thought to myself "how much support for this type of character is there in POW?"... I quickly skimmed through the styles and while I did see the odd move here and there, no one style seemed to make its self the go to style for protecting someone. There is of course the Sworn Protector whos Shared Counter ability really helps build this character type but no style. Anyway its an Idea for a future style if you haven't already made one... I’m sure many a Wiz/Soc would love to have a cohort with such a style.

I think a Sworn Protector Warder with the Bodyguard and In Harms Way feats would embody this concept pretty darn well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Prince of Knives wrote:
...Cursed Razor, Eternal Guardian, and Shattered Mirror...

I'm guessing these are all styles from POW2 that I should be / am looking forward to reading when its out. Nice to know you guys are a step ahead of me. :)

Gambit wrote:
DragGon7601 wrote:
On another note I was watching a random youtube video about honor in martial arts (or rather the lack of it in real life history), and he mentioned a style for bodyguards... This reminded me of the devoted defender from the old 3rd Ed, and I thought to myself "how much support for this type of character is there in POW?"... I quickly skimmed through the styles and while I did see the odd move here and there, no one style seemed to make its self the go to style for protecting someone. There is of course the Sworn Protector whos Shared Counter ability really helps build this character type but no style. Anyway its an Idea for a future style if you haven't already made one... I’m sure many a Wiz/Soc would love to have a cohort with such a style.
I think a Sworn Protector Warder with the Bodyguard and In Harms Way feats would embody this concept pretty darn well.

You are right, but I think that if there are multipliable ways of doing something then you have more flexibility. Sworn Protector locks you into one class, a style can be granted to any POW class through an organisation. You only get so many feats as you level so having other ways to gain the same bonuses would help those who wanted to use their feats for other things.

Those wanting to take a path close to what you have pointed out may also want to look at the Bushi's "Bushido -Respect" class ability and the stance "Ready the Draw" from Mithral Current. Both could help those feats. The Warlords Tactical Assistance class ability (gain at level 8) could also be of interest (to boast those feats) but then your multi classing or not a Sworn Protector. Just some ideas.

Edit: If you have Combat Reflexes and are using Ready the Draw stance, do you gain both your Dex and Initiating Modifier in extra Attacks of Opportunity. Or just the greater of the 2? I wouldn't be surprised if it was the later as it is kind of a named bonus, but I wouldn't want to deprive myself of the extra attacks if its the former.


ErrantX wrote:
Gambit wrote:

Cross posting from the OotS forums in the hopes that Jeremy sees and it can hopefully be remedied before the book goes to print.

In the book it says that the Zweihander Sentinel trades Broken Blade for Scarlet Throne, and loses Bluff (aka, the Iron Tortoise skill) but gains Sense Motive. Shouldn't it lose Acrobatics (the Broken Blade skill), not Bluff.

Also in the Dervish Defender, it says you gain Thrashing Dragon and lose Iron Tortoise. It then says that you lose Bluff as a class skill and gain Acrobatics as a class skill...except the Warder already has Acrobatics as one of his base class skills (seeing how its also the skill for Broken Blade). So does he just lose Bluff and gain nothing?

I was confused on the question, for some reason (high on cold medicine I suspect; this cold needs to leave NOW) when I was fielding this on GiTP I was out of my mind. Zweihander Sentinels should drop Acrobatics to gain Sense Motive, not Acrobatics. And yes, Dervish Defenders drop Bluff. The reasoning for the 'gain Acrobatics' line is say you're also a member of the Veiled Moon tradition, and drop Broken Blade for it (losing Acrobatics and gaining Stealth), this would give you Dragon (gaining Acrobatics) and losing Bluff with Tortoise. Make sense?

-X

O.o Sure it wasn't the style that you got wrong and not the skill... It makes sense that those who "eschew shields and focus on utilizing a single two-handed weapon for both offense and defense" by taking that arch-type would lose access to the shield style... I would still want the unarmed style as a back up... So maybe I'm wrong and its a balancing thing.

And for those that want to say I'm wrong because their Armament Shield ability mentions Iron Tortoise, please keep in mind that there is a feat to get maneuvers from styles you don't have and there is also things like cross classing that could get you them.


DragGon7601 wrote:

Those wanting to take a path close to what you have pointed out may also want to look at the Bushi's "Bushido -Respect" class ability and the stance "Ready the Draw" from Mithral Current. Both could help those feats. The Warlords Tactical Assistance class ability (gain at level 8) could also be of interest (to boast those feats) but then your multi classing or not a Sworn Protector. Just some ideas.

Edit: If you have Combat Reflexes and are using Ready the Draw stance, do you gain both your Dex and Initiating Modifier in extra Attacks of Opportunity. Or just the greater of the 2? I wouldn't be surprised if it was the later as it is kind of a named bonus, but I wouldn't want to deprive myself of the extra attacks if its the former.

It's always nice to hear my work suggested to others :D

To answer your question, the number of AoOs stack. You get both your Dex and your Initiating Modifier


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'd like to request a few maneuvers for PoW2, if that's okay:
1) Spinning your weapon so fast it catches fire
2) Punching someone into the air, jumping after them, doing a combo and smashing them in the ground (probably a series of maneuvers)
3) Hadouken!
4) Spinning in place so fast you create a vacuum that brings opponents closer to you
5) A powerful stomp that deals damage and creates difficult terrain
6) Clapping your hands together to create a stunning/deafening shockwave
7) Some way to double jump
8) Punching your weapons to increase momentum
9) Using cannonballs as (useful) improvised weapons
10) Wearing a devil's skin and becoming more powerful (I'll never stop requesting this!)


DragGon7601 wrote:
Prince of Knives wrote:
...Cursed Razor, Eternal Guardian, and Shattered Mirror...
I'm guessing these are all styles from POW2 that I should be / am looking forward to reading when its out. Nice to know you guys are a step ahead of me. :)

They are. And Cursed Razor comes with the most AMAZING BRILLIANT flavor EVER. Hot DAMN did I throw Whisper and the Quills into my homebrew setting the INSTANT I read about her.

PLEASE tell me that's still in =)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

@ Orthos: Cursed Razor retains both flavor and some of the associated organisations.

@True_shinken: We'll see what we can do!


Awesome =D


Orthos wrote:
DragGon7601 wrote:
Prince of Knives wrote:
...Cursed Razor, Eternal Guardian, and Shattered Mirror...
I'm guessing these are all styles from POW2 that I should be / am looking forward to reading when its out. Nice to know you guys are a step ahead of me. :)

They are. And Cursed Razor comes with the most AMAZING BRILLIANT flavor EVER. Hot DAMN did I throw Whisper and the Quills into my homebrew setting the INSTANT I read about her.

PLEASE tell me that's still in =)

[Blushing intensifies]

Speaking of, I'd like to request feedback on Traditions as a system & the Traditions themselves. I realize that I say this a lot but they were my first foray into...formalizing an organization? I've implied them plenty of times, but never really went out and done it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Prince of Knives wrote:
Orthos wrote:
DragGon7601 wrote:
Prince of Knives wrote:
...Cursed Razor, Eternal Guardian, and Shattered Mirror...
I'm guessing these are all styles from POW2 that I should be / am looking forward to reading when its out. Nice to know you guys are a step ahead of me. :)

They are. And Cursed Razor comes with the most AMAZING BRILLIANT flavor EVER. Hot DAMN did I throw Whisper and the Quills into my homebrew setting the INSTANT I read about her.

PLEASE tell me that's still in =)

[Blushing intensifies]

Speaking of, I'd like to request feedback on Traditions as a system & the Traditions themselves. I realize that I say this a lot but they were my first foray into...formalizing an organization? I've implied them plenty of times, but never really went out and done it.

You wrote the Traditions on page 152+ in PoW? I gotta say they're almost my favorite part of the book (My favorite part is the Class section).

The explanation given on 152 explains exactly what the traditions are and how to use them in a game. The explanations are very clear on what's optional, suggested, ect and comes across well. The format you used for the Traditions themselves is perfect and the headers are accurate to the content. The lore behind them is also very awesome and fun to read. I believe that a player with an Oath to an Organization has just about everything needed to role play that character. I don't think anything could have been done better, which is pretty high praise I think.

The only gripe I have is that I feel the Traditions combined with Archetypes let a lot of Disciplines that really defined classes for me previously can now be spread to anyone (Scarlet Throne, Veiled Moon, and Iron Tortoise) I think Traditions may have been better off using Disciplines that don't show up on classes, like Black Seraph. This probably isn't a common opinion, but I don't particularly like classes losing definition. I can't fault you on that either as I know for a fact asking for 6 new disciplines in the Tradition section would be a lot of work and wouldn't have fit into the play test.

Since you also wrote the Harbringer I can say that you really have a gift for making material with strong flavor. The Harbringer has a very strong and consistent unifying flavor that makes it very cool. Of all of the classes in PoW1+2 revealed so far, which also have a high level of unifying flavor, I think the Harbringer wins out as the most tasty.


IMHO, the Traditions (since it was asked) as presented are what I'd rather wished for in Paizo's Combat of the Inner Sea or other works with factions and whatnot. It gave me just enough to make these organizations cross-portable to various campaigns, with enough detail to make them viable and plenty of things defined to make them realistic. Even though it's outside of the scope of PoW, I'd like to see some things added for non-PoW classes, for example Cavalier orders who are members of one of these traditions, etc.
My only gripe has to do with layout; in a couple places the name of the tradition is on the last line of a column and continues in the next with the description (see Defenders & Empyreal Guardians). That made it a bit distracting, but is something I'd wager is easily fixed and might not be such a big deal in a print version.

TL/DR - Traditions are cool, use them.


I haven't gotten to sit down and read the complete book yet >_< Consider it on the to-do list (and a review to follow!).


Orthos wrote:
I haven't gotten to sit down and read the complete book yet >_< Consider it on the to-do list (and a review to follow!).

Quite alright, my friend :p Just keep in mind that Whisper's servants are in PoW 2, and are yet to be freed from the dark shackles of Beta.

Sczarni

I remember seeing something about magic items and even weapon abilities. Are those part of the first PoW release or will thos ebe somewhere else?


Insain Dragoon wrote:
You wrote the Traditions on page 152+ in PoW? I gotta say they're almost my favorite part of the book (My favorite part is the Class section).

I just want to jump in for a sec and mention that while I was proofing the book, I found something similar. In absolutely no way should this be taken that I found the rest of the book less than stellar, but there's a massive difference between fluff and crunch. Crunch is interesting because of what it can do. Fluff has to be interesting in and of itself.

My personal habit is to treat fluff much like crunch; when I need a god that does X, I go look up something to fit into my story. When I need a country that has Y, again, I go look it up. I don't (ever) just read fluff. I find without a plot, fluff is generally just like a sentence with no verb. No story? No point. Reference only.

But the traditions in PoW were different. I actually enjoyed reading them. I won't say that I would've bothered if I wasn't already going through it word-for-word, but I will say that the section was one of the most enjoyable works of RPG fluff I've read in a long time.


Anguish wrote:

I just want to jump in for a sec and mention that while I was proofing the book, I found something similar. In absolutely no way should this be taken that I found the rest of the book less than stellar, but there's a massive difference between fluff and crunch. Crunch is interesting because of what it can do. Fluff has to be interesting in and of itself.

My personal habit is to treat fluff much like crunch; when I need a god that does X, I go look up something to fit into my story. When I need a country that has Y, again, I go look it up. I don't (ever) just read fluff. I find without a plot, fluff is generally just like a sentence with no verb. No story? No point. Reference only.

But the traditions in PoW were different. I actually enjoyed reading them. I won't say that I would've bothered if I wasn't already going through it word-for-word, but I will say that the section was one of the most enjoyable works of RPG fluff I've read in a long time.

Interesting. For me, it's usually quite the opposite; I don't really care too much for the bones/crunch (aside from making sure the math adds up), and I tend to trust those mathematicians to do their thing. But without compelling meat/'fluff'* the content is meaningless to me. As such, I'm more likely to use more flavorful elements with less mechanical benefits than the opposite. YMMV.

* I despise the word fluff as I feel this is a horrible insult to a creative writer. It's like saying that all that really matters is the mechanics of things. If that's the case, then why not just play poker? I prefer the terms 'meat and bones' - you have the bones that give it a framework, but you need the meat to actually make it move (barring necromancy, of course).


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Changing Man wrote:


Interesting. For me, it's usually quite the opposite; I don't really care too much for the bones/crunch (aside from making sure the math adds up), and I tend to trust those mathematicians to do their thing. But without compelling meat/'fluff'* the content is meaningless to me. As such, I'm more likely to use more flavorful elements with less mechanical benefits than the opposite. YMMV.

* I despise the word fluff as I feel this is a horrible insult to a creative writer. It's like saying that all that really matters is the mechanics of things. If that's the case, then why not just play poker? I prefer the terms 'meat and bones' - you have the bones that give it a framework, but you need the meat to actually make it move (barring necromancy, of course).

Oh Asmodeus what. Don't trust our math man! Do you have any idea how much of this stuff was written at four in the morning, plus or minus booze? Even very, very talented designers make serious math mistakes, and we really appreciate catches on it.

As far as the term 'fluff'; as a creative writer myself, fluff is a really good term for it, actually. The thing is, mechanics are hard to change. They're hard to change because they require an overall understanding of the game that approaches an absurd level of dedication. Flavor, though, is easy to change. I'm certainly not expecting anyone to have to use my fluff straight. Yes, I try to write good fluff and I hope people like it and are inspired by it but at the end of the day there is no reason to let something I wrote dictate facts about your campaign world unless you want it to.


Insain Dragoon wrote:
Prince of Knives wrote:
Orthos wrote:
DragGon7601 wrote:
Prince of Knives wrote:
...Cursed Razor, Eternal Guardian, and Shattered Mirror...
I'm guessing these are all styles from POW2 that I should be / am looking forward to reading when its out. Nice to know you guys are a step ahead of me. :)

They are. And Cursed Razor comes with the most AMAZING BRILLIANT flavor EVER. Hot DAMN did I throw Whisper and the Quills into my homebrew setting the INSTANT I read about her.

PLEASE tell me that's still in =)

[Blushing intensifies]

Speaking of, I'd like to request feedback on Traditions as a system & the Traditions themselves. I realize that I say this a lot but they were my first foray into...formalizing an organization? I've implied them plenty of times, but never really went out and done it.

You wrote the Traditions on page 152+ in PoW? I gotta say they're almost my favorite part of the book (My favorite part is the Class section).

The explanation given on 152 explains exactly what the traditions are and how to use them in a game. The explanations are very clear on what's optional, suggested, ect and comes across well. The format you used for the Traditions themselves is perfect and the headers are accurate to the content. The lore behind them is also very awesome and fun to read. I believe that a player with an Oath to an Organization has just about everything needed to role play that character. I don't think anything could have been done better, which is pretty high praise I think.

The only gripe I have is that I feel the Traditions combined with Archetypes let a lot of Disciplines that really defined classes for me previously can now be spread to anyone (Scarlet Throne, Veiled Moon, and Iron Tortoise) I think Traditions may have been better off using Disciplines that don't show up on classes, like Black Seraph. This probably isn't a common opinion, but I don't...

I like that the Traditions gave class's access to the disciplines of other class's. If I want to play a guy who can teleport around the room punching people then a Steelfist Commando warlord who can use a lot of Veiled Moon moves would fit perfectly. Would he be over powered? Not as far as I know. He would be unique, but as heros are we not intended to be unique? If I have an idea for a character then the rules should only get in my way if it would be overpowered, otherwise the rules should inspire me to come up with something different. Something that can help make a story interesting...

I find the Traditions a good tool for this. Good job!


Prince of Knives wrote:
Oh Asmodeus what. Don't trust our math man! Do you have any idea how much of this stuff was written at four in the morning, plus or minus booze? Even very, very talented designers make serious math mistakes, and we really appreciate catches on it.

I don't trust any one person's math, but with the dozens of playtesters who get their hands on things, I'm pretty confident somebody will get it sorted out right before the final draft is released. And I'm also rather sure there's at least one of 'em who is not doing it at 4 am with copious amounts of booze ;) So in the end, it's all good.

Prince of Knives wrote:

As far as the term 'fluff'; as a creative writer myself, fluff is a really good term for it, actually. The thing is, mechanics are hard to change. They're hard to change because they require an overall understanding of the game that approaches an absurd level of dedication. Flavor, though, is easy to change. I'm certainly not expecting anyone to have to use my fluff straight. Yes, I try to write good fluff and I hope people like it and are inspired by it but at the end of the day there is no reason to let something I wrote dictate facts about your campaign world unless you want it to.

Hey, if you are personally cool with that, great! I just know that I've spoken with other people who are not so cool with their hard work and creativity being treated as relatively irrelevant, or second-fiddle at best with the mechanics. If nothing else, I think both should be given equal weight. But yeah, to each their own, no harm - no foul, ymmv, etc.!


3 people marked this as a favorite.

And really, that's for the best. Reflavoring things should be more common than it is, IMO. It's the whole "Rogue vs rogue" problem - just because there's a class named after the character archetype doesn't mean that's the only way to build/play one, and vice versa. I heavily encourage my players to tell me what they want mechanically, if they're having trouble putting a specific concept together, and tweak the flavor of it so they get the visuals they want after finding the mechanics to suit their plans.

Since I've already waxed fanatical about it, I'll take the Cursed Razor flavor as an excellent example. In my homebrew, one of the first things I did was decide the who-what-why behind Whisper's inscrutable motivations. I established her identity behind the pseudonym, gave her a backstory, gave her reasons for why the Quills do the bizarre and enigmatic things they do, and so forth, so that looking at things from a worldbuilder's high perspective the actions of the Quills as a whole make a sort of sense. I'm sure for others who will do similarly, their Whisper's reasons and their methods will be very different from mine. And there will likely be still others who think the enigma and the not knowing is a core part of the organization's flavor, EVEN for a GM/worldbuilder, and will deliberately refuse to give even themselves any solid answers, because in their minds that will ruin the flavor of the organization.

It all comes down to individual taste, needs, and design.


Andreas Rönnqvist wrote:

@ Orthos: Cursed Razor retains both flavor and some of the associated organisations.

@True_shinken: We'll see what we can do!

:D

yay!


GhanjRho wrote:
Just got the final. Love the look and feel of it. As of right now, the only change I'd make is in the stance progression, specifically moving the 4th stance back one level (to IL 9). This gives the 5th-level stances some better play space, avoiding lumping them in with the 6th level stances. And if the initiator doesn't have access to 5ths, they just take another 3rd

Anyone have any thoughts on this? Specifically moving the stances gained at 8th (and possibly 11th) back one level?


GhanjRho wrote:
GhanjRho wrote:
Just got the final. Love the look and feel of it. As of right now, the only change I'd make is in the stance progression, specifically moving the 4th stance back one level (to IL 9). This gives the 5th-level stances some better play space, avoiding lumping them in with the 6th level stances. And if the initiator doesn't have access to 5ths, they just take another 3rd
Anyone have any thoughts on this? Specifically moving the stances gained at 8th (and possibly 11th) back one level?

Stances tend to be pretty potent always on, or at least renewable abilities. I'm not sure introducing them earlier is necessarily a good idea. It promotes even more early level dipping/cherry picking of abilities.

Also from previous posts I believe they were attempting to makes stances more attractive for use over a character's career. Meaning that even though a stance might be gained and another stance shortly after, the one isn't being so much replaced by a better version, as the newer stance probably offers a different ability in the same theme. That 5th level stance would retain relevance in comparison to the 6th level as well. They would still both have their uses, though maybe in different situations.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

We may need to add the following bar to either PoW1 for future printings and also definitely add it to PoW2:

Quote:

Fire Damage and Solar Wind

This will potentially come up at the gaming table about how Solar Wind inflicts fire damage, and while that's well and good, what if you wanted to be a lightning archer or a cold thrower? In this case, consider a basic flavor change to the discipline. Raging Storm is a cousin of the Solar Wind discipline, changing the damaging effects of fire to electrical damage. Also, the Glacial Chill discipline is descended from Solar Wind disciples who went to the frigid climes of the world who adapted their arts to use the bitter cold of freezing winds to do cold damage. This is a choice that should be made when taking Solar Wind maneuvers for the first time and cannot be changed without purchasing the Advanced Study feat to learn different elemental damage types for Solar Wind (cold, fire, and electricity only), effectively learning the specific maneuver again or a new maneuver of a different elemental damage type.

What do people think? Pick it apart.

-X


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That's actually a flavorful way to handle it ErrantX.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

ErrantX wrote:

We may need to add the following bar to either PoW1 for future printings and also definitely add it to PoW2:

Quote:

Fire Damage and Solar Wind

This will potentially come up at the gaming table about how Solar Wind inflicts fire damage, and while that's well and good, what if you wanted to be a lightning archer or a cold thrower? In this case, consider a basic flavor change to the discipline. Raging Storm is a cousin of the Solar Wind discipline, changing the damaging effects of fire to electrical damage. Also, the Glacial Chill discipline is descended from Solar Wind disciples who went to the frigid climes of the world who adapted their arts to use the bitter cold of freezing winds to do cold damage. This is a choice that should be made when taking Solar Wind maneuvers for the first time and cannot be changed without purchasing the Advanced Study feat to learn different elemental damage types for Solar Wind (cold, fire, and electricity only), effectively learning the specific maneuver again or a new maneuver of a different elemental damage type.

What do people think? Pick it apart.

-X

I like it! Would you consider a more generalized Martial Admixture kind of feat allowing you to swap other elemental effects of a maneuver or discipline?

Publisher, Dreamscarred Press

I think that's more appropriate to add to a FAQ on PoW - our new site probably needs a dedicated FAQ page, between Psionics, POW, and Akashic...


I absolutely love it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jeremy Smith wrote:
I think that's more appropriate to add to a FAQ on PoW - our new site probably needs a dedicated FAQ page, between Psionics, POW, and Akashic...

I'd agree that it shouldn't be retconned into POW1. Followup books are an appropriate place to offer expanded options, so it could make it into print there as a sidebar. Throwing it somewhere as web content is also reasonable.


It's beautiful man.


I don't like feats or traits as a solution to this, I think that's FAR too expensive. I'm trying to find a way to make this work without a feat.

-X

Publisher, Dreamscarred Press

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Why not have it be a choice made at the start of the day or when recovering maneuvers? Psionics has it that you can change your energy type when gaining psionic focus.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Jeremy Smith wrote:
Why not have it be a choice made at the start of the day or when recovering maneuvers? Psionics has it that you can change your energy type when gaining psionic focus.

Recovering maneuvers is snot easier than recovering psionic focus, so maybe not that (or make sure it's only available under very specific circumstances), but I kind of like the idea of a martial active energy type.

...

Man hindsight sucks. I don't know why none of us thought to talk about this way back when Solar Wind first hit playtest and we were all discussing the problems with it being mono-elemental.


Skylancer4 wrote:
GhanjRho wrote:
GhanjRho wrote:
Just got the final. Love the look and feel of it. As of right now, the only change I'd make is in the stance progression, specifically moving the 4th stance back one level (to IL 9). This gives the 5th-level stances some better play space, avoiding lumping them in with the 6th level stances. And if the initiator doesn't have access to 5ths, they just take another 3rd
Anyone have any thoughts on this? Specifically moving the stances gained at 8th (and possibly 11th) back one level?

Stances tend to be pretty potent always on, or at least renewable abilities. I'm not sure introducing them earlier is necessarily a good idea. It promotes even more early level dipping/cherry picking of abilities.

Also from previous posts I believe they were attempting to makes stances more attractive for use over a character's career. Meaning that even though a stance might be gained and another stance shortly after, the one isn't being so much replaced by a better version, as the newer stance probably offers a different ability in the same theme. That 5th level stance would retain relevance in comparison to the 6th level as well. They would still both have their uses, though maybe in different situations.

First off, this wouldn't give you a stance earlier. At least, not any earlier than your IL would allow. The problem is that you have some disciplines with stances at 5th level, some with stances at 6th level, and some with stances at both. What shifting the 4th stance back a level would do is open it up. If you have a discipline that gives a 5th level stance, you don't need to wait two levels to get it, and you don't need to give up a feat or a 6th level stance for it.


Pondering to buy the book(s). From what I've read this seems like a worthy successor to 9swords (which I loved).

One question though. Is there a discipline (planned or already implemented) focussing on unarmed strikes and energy based attacks (or perhaps even force damage)? I'd like my hadoken, kamehameha and machinegun KI attacks now plz :)


Scorpioni wrote:

Pondering to buy the book(s). From what I've read this seems like a worthy successor to 9swords (which I loved).

One question though. Is there a discipline (planned or already implemented) focussing on unarmed strikes and energy based attacks (or perhaps even force damage)? I'd like my hadoken, kamehameha and machinegun KI attacks now plz :)

Last I heard the Blade Mystic has two Unique Disciplines, one of which being Elemental Flux. Considering most Disciplines technically don't require specific weapons I do believe Elemental Flux could be applied to fists. I don't know the particulars of the Discipline, but I am assuming it involves different Energy Types based on the maneuver.

Additionally I believe Elemental Flux will be tied to an organization too, so you could apply it to any Initiator class. I would suggest the Stalker as it's already a great "Monk" class.


GhanjRho wrote:
Skylancer4 wrote:
GhanjRho wrote:
GhanjRho wrote:
Just got the final. Love the look and feel of it. As of right now, the only change I'd make is in the stance progression, specifically moving the 4th stance back one level (to IL 9). This gives the 5th-level stances some better play space, avoiding lumping them in with the 6th level stances. And if the initiator doesn't have access to 5ths, they just take another 3rd
Anyone have any thoughts on this? Specifically moving the stances gained at 8th (and possibly 11th) back one level?

Stances tend to be pretty potent always on, or at least renewable abilities. I'm not sure introducing them earlier is necessarily a good idea. It promotes even more early level dipping/cherry picking of abilities.

Also from previous posts I believe they were attempting to makes stances more attractive for use over a character's career. Meaning that even though a stance might be gained and another stance shortly after, the one isn't being so much replaced by a better version, as the newer stance probably offers a different ability in the same theme. That 5th level stance would retain relevance in comparison to the 6th level as well. They would still both have their uses, though maybe in different situations.

First off, this wouldn't give you a stance earlier. At least, not any earlier than your IL would allow. The problem is that you have some disciplines with stances at 5th level, some with stances at 6th level, and some with stances at both. What shifting the 4th stance back a level would do is open it up. If you have a discipline that gives a 5th level stance, you don't need to wait two levels to get it, and you don't need to give up a feat or a 6th level stance for it.

I never said it gave them to you "early," I did say it promotes more dipping into the classes if the stances are moved to earlier levels.

Having them at points not on the "immediately available" level promotes staying in the class. Also it isn't like these levels are "dead" because you aren't getting a stance, you are still being class abilities, maneuvers known and or readied, etc. Maybe even all of those.

Again stances tend to be persistent effects, sometimes quite powerful. As a martial class you'll be gaining several of them, more than enough to fulfill whatever themed character you want. If you want more of them, having to invest a feat or two isn't a horrible or unheard of "thing" in this game. Psionic characters have to use feats to gain extra known powers, casters have to do the same to research spells or gain spells known. I'm not quite sure why the martial classes shouldn't have to make a few "hard" (and I use that term very loosely, almost jokingly due to the following point) choices every once in awhile. As has been mentioned before, these classes don't require much system mastery to be rather potent. I don't believe your suggested change is either warranted or even necessarily positive to the overall system. It is already quite powerful as it stands.


Insain Dragoon, thanks for the information. Is the Mystic already in playtest? You say most discplines don't require specific weapons but I assume they have an additional effect with the specific weapon? Are there any disciplines dedicated to unarmed strike (or close weapons)?

Thanks in advance!

2,051 to 2,100 of 2,138 << first < prev | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Third-Party Pathfinder RPG Products / Product Discussion / Dreamscarred Press introduces the Path of War All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.