Coriat, as per the readied action rules the readied action goes off before the charge attack does.
Monk: ready an action to attack first creature that comes within 10 feet of me.
Enemy: I charge the Monk.
Monk: when he reaches 10' away I take a 5' step (moving closer) and perform my attack. I choose to make my attack using Fighting Defensively.
Enemy: Stupid Monk, I complete my attack and will brain him but good! I hit!
Monk: I negate your hit, what now?
Enemy: DOH!
On top of that the Monk has a +4 AC bonus (+3 before level 3) making him that much harder to hit on successive attacks (if any).
Edit: I see you were responding to my earlier version. It was correct, but you misread the order as me saying that the declaration of the readied action gave him Fighting Defensively. I was indicating that after made the readied action attack he is fighting defensively.
I agree, Crane Wing is the better of the two feats. That's why it required more to take and use this option. However, in regards to your reasoning against thorin:
Fact: You can gain 100% impervious to missile fire by numerous methods, the simplest of which is walking behind a corner.
You can't DO that with melee attacks.
You're talking about cover. The rules for cover are more restrictive against melee attacks than they are ranged attacks. Soft cover is an impediment to ranged attackers, but it ALSO affects ranged melee builds. So, good luck attacking over your allies shoulder if you want to use the Lunge feat or your nifty near +3 longspear, your target has cover. Also, Improved Precise Shot reduces the cover bonus into nothing if the attacker moves a few feet to actually be able to see you again.
Fact: You are a melee character. You can FORCE characters out of ranged combat by running up to them and daring them to try that again.
Assuming they can't safely 5-ft step, sure. Also, assuming they aren't behind interposing terrain or are flying or something. It's not always quite as easy as walking up and yelling "Boo!"
Fact: Melee attacks tend to do MUCh more damage then ranged attacks, and often cater to a monster's highest stat (str) to drive the point home.
Yeah, but then Deadly Aim is a thing. Also, thrown weapons and composite longbows allow Str mod to damage. A monster with spell buffs like Good Hope or Divine Favor might also have a higher damage mod and be built better as a ranged attacker than melee. Not saying the damage isn't weighed in melee's favor, but I'd hesitate to call it an overwhelming comparison.
Coriat, that is easily taken care of with: I ready an action to hit the first guy that comes within reach of me, he charged? Great, now I am Fighting Defensively. Or: I go attack his little buddy, now I am fighting defensively. Or: I attack (insert cheese thing here such as a wall, ally, whatever), now I am fighting defensively.Doing so gives up the entirety of your turn. If the target of the readied action doesn't charge you, your whole turn is wasted. I mean really? Whose the guy gonna charge? The dude getting ready to deflect him or the wizard with the pointy hat at the back eh?
You can ready an action to hit him before he gets into his stance for fighting defensively at the start of his turn.
Yes. You can still get the benefit of the feat against a charger if you can correctly predict and/or influence your enemy's actions, but if using the rules properly, it can be difficult to ensure everything goes your way.
It boils down to surrendering the initiative in combat to your foe in the hope that he will misuse it. Which can work sometimes, but is not guaranteed and becomes a question of competing tactics rather than one of literal immunity.
While cool, bypassing the restrictions on those feats via a class dip, was problematic. Besides, mixing the different styles is it's shtick, not cheating into them early.
I do not see anyone complaining about early access to monkey or shiatan style.
I've seen so many Masters of "Many" Styles focus on a single style and then leave the class. They should have been allowed to bypass the requisites on the actual style feat, then build into the others in the line(like Crane Wing) with their regular feats/higher tier bonus feats like regular monks. Would get a lot more MoMS PCs with multiple styles instead of rushing for the one they plan to exploit.
Not sure what is the problem. Remove the Master of many styles, and the style feat would be a thing just for monks and unarmed fighters.
Another idea is to simply make CW scale with level...
Same as the pre-errata version, but instead of automatically deflecting attack, it would be something like this...
BAB/Monk level 1~6: Add +4 to AC.
BAB/Monk level 7~11: Add +8 to AC.
BAB/Monk level 12+: Automatically deflect 1 melee attack (but no touch attacks or natural 20s).TA-DAAAA!!!
We get a new scaling Combat feat (something PF desperately needs!) and CW only gets the automatic deflection when everything is already making 3+ attacks and PFS modules are mostly over anyway (so those whiny GM crybabies don't cry foul).
I woudl preferthe not auto-deflect thing, but It woudl be considerably better feat that way. Also, the bonus to AC have t be reactive, not like in the new crane wing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You know that T-Rex everyone cries as being abused by those awful, awful, mean birdie monks? He has reach.
If he charges the Crane Wing character who readied an action to attack the T-Rex... he can't, as the T-Rex is not within his reach. So no Crane Wing on the T-Rex charge because he isn't fighting defensively yet.
I never considered Crane Wing the best part of the feat chain, for me, it was always Crane Style + Crane Riposte, for the reduced penalties while fighting defensively. Unless a character has pumped his AC so high he only gets hit once a round at best, then Crane Wing is just a bonus, not the main point of the build. The -1/+4 is more useful, in my opinion, as it helps ensure all of the less accurate attacks miss more often.
I generally assume the first attack a creature makes is going to hit, so my goal when building up AC is to maximize the chance those iterative or secondary attacks miss, while minimizing my attack penalties.
Coriat, that is easily taken care of with: I ready an action to hit the first guy that comes within reach of me.
Now he is Fighting Defensively.
This has no basis in any actual rules text and has been specifically confirmed to be wrong.
Fighting Defensively doesn't apply till you make the attack. It does not begin when you ready the action.
What an awful rule >:(
Monk: when he reaches 10' away I take a 5' step (moving closer) and perform my attack. I choose to make my attack using Fighting Defensively.
How are you taking a 5' step when it isn't your turn?
How are you taking a 5' step when it isn't your turn?
Monk: when he reaches 10' away I take a 5' step (moving closer) and perform my attack. I choose to make my attack using Fighting Defensively.
"You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round."
"You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round."How are you taking a 5' step when it isn't your turn?
Monk: when he reaches 10' away I take a 5' step (moving closer) and perform my attack. I choose to make my attack using Fighting Defensively.
Oh neat.
So, let's say you're fine taking up your whole turn. Let's say the monk is up against a fifth level two-handed fighter, on total defense.
How does the fighter injure the monk?
This is a legit question, by the way. I'm curious. If there is a reasonable way, I'd probably revise my vote to #1.
I agree, Crane Wing is the better of the two feats. That's why it required more to take and use this option. However, in regards to your reasoning against thorin:
Fact: You can gain 100% impervious to missile fire by numerous methods, the simplest of which is walking behind a corner.
You can't DO that with melee attacks.You're talking about cover. The rules for cover are more restrictive against melee attacks than they are ranged attacks. Soft cover is an impediment to ranged attackers, but it ALSO affects ranged melee builds. So, good luck attacking over your allies shoulder if you want to use the Lunge feat or your nifty near +3 longspear, your target has cover. Also, Improved Precise Shot reduces the cover bonus into nothing if the attacker moves a few feet to actually be able to see you again.
Fact: You are a melee character. You can FORCE characters out of ranged combat by running up to them and daring them to try that again.Assuming they can't safely 5-ft step, sure. Also, assuming they aren't behind interposing terrain or are flying or something. It's not always quite as easy as walking up and yelling "Boo!"
Fact: Melee attacks tend to do MUCh more damage then ranged attacks, and often cater to a monster's highest stat (str) to drive the point home.Yeah, but then Deadly Aim is a thing. Also, thrown weapons and composite longbows allow Str mod to damage. A monster with spell buffs like Good Hope or Divine Favor might also have a higher damage mod and be built better as a ranged attacker than melee. Not saying the damage isn't weighed in melee's favor, but I'd hesitate to call it an overwhelming comparison.
I wouldn't hesitate at all. Nobody builds a build around Deflect Arrows!
Um, there is no ranged melee build. Either you're in reach, or you're not.
The vast majority of enemies do not have Improved Precise Shot. Only incredible dedicated missile guys get that, maybe 1% of all the enemies you will ever fight?
And most melee guys don't fight over the shoulders of melee guys. Crane Stylists, needing a hand free, definitely aren't going to do that.
If the missile guy thinks a mere 5' step is going to save him, he hasn't heard of reach, lunge, or step up and strike. the melee isn't dumb, after all. "Gee, why didn't I think he'd make a 5' step to get out of my reach? Oh, right, I did!" SPLAT.
The vast majority of foes do not have deadly aim, and only if they are dedicated missile tossers. Again, 2% of all foes?
Compare said number to the number of foes who melee. 80%? 90%?
Crane Wing was beloved for a reason. Deflect Missile is ignored for a reason.
==Aelryinth
So, let's say you're fine taking up your whole turn. Let's say the monk is up against a fifth level two-handed fighter, on total defense.
How does the fighter injure the monk?
This is a legit question, by the way. I'm curious. If there is a reasonable way, I'd probably revise my vote to #1.
Alchemist Fire...
So, basically, monks are swarms?
;)
I find myself agreeing with Aelrynth, you do not see people multiclasing monk just because defelct arrow, that shoudl tell htat hte feats are not comparable.
Still, it is annoying how PF can not find a good middle for the abilities. Few are solid but blaanced, a couple are too good and a lot are waste of ink.
Hmmm, ranged combat brings up a valid point, a monk can throw a shuriken or other one handed ranged weapon at the enemy and engage Fighting Defensively at that point. Provided the monk wins initiative there should be no reason that he cannot be fighting defensively whenever attacked.
I find myself agreeing with Aelrynth, you do not see people multiclasing monk just because defelct arrow, that shoudl tell htat hte feats are not comparable.
Still, it is annoying how PF can not find a good middle for the abilities. Few are solid but blaanced, a couple are too good and a lot are waste of ink.
No, one has a much greater investment for a greater payoff. Or did before it was neutered.
No, one has a much greater investment for a greater payoff. Or did before it was neutered.I find myself agreeing with Aelrynth, you do not see people multiclasing monk just because defelct arrow, that shoudl tell htat hte feats are not comparable.
Still, it is annoying how PF can not find a good middle for the abilities. Few are solid but blaanced, a couple are too good and a lot are waste of ink.
Wich, IMHO, make those two feats not comparable.
I don't see why one disregards Deflect Arrows so easily. Aren't Archers considered very, very effective in combat?
What if there was a feat that allowed an auto melee deflect like the old Crane Wing that was just as easily taken? Would that trivialize melee and or the feat just cause it's easier to obtain?
Because Deflect Arrows works against 1 arrow/rd. Archers get Rapid Shot, multishot, and full attacks. Archers aren't limited at all by move and attack, nor by the low level restriction of 1 at/rd. They always have multiple attacks.
Deflect Arrows gets worse and worse with levels.
Crane Wing works, in its old form, devastatingly well in its old form, and with decent play/movement/positioning by the player, incredibly well at later levels. It was always great.
==Aelryinth
I don't see why one disregards Deflect Arrows so easily. Aren't Archers considered very, very effective in combat?
What if there was a feat that allowed an auto melee deflect like the old Crane Wing that was just as easily taken? Would that trivialize melee and or melee just cause it's easier to obtain?
Because a big part of what makes archery good in pathfinder is that it gets multiple attacks very early in the game, and can make those attacks every round.
I get why archery is considered effective, but doesn't ultimately Crane Wing's old deflection component reduce in effectiveness too? As you get to higher levels, you're bombarded with more and more melee attacks(both natural and manufactured). And as for volume of melee attacks in early game, TWF has always been a thing and can remain competitive in volume of attacks IIRC.
I mean, I haven't run the numbers personally, but it doesn't seem like that huge of a difference.
"CW is OP because the character can move away and force others to make a single attack against her."
Then the CW-using char is limited to a single attack as well, maybe 2, if we count the AoO. And now nothing is stopping the enemy from going after other targets, like the squishy mage, because the Monk or decided hiding in the corner was a better idea.
Darth Grall, it is a huge difference.
In the case of Deflect Arrows it does not change your AC and then blocks one of three "best attack bonus" arrows. The remaining arrows have penalties (-5/-10/-15) to hit.
In the case of iterative attacks the old Crane Wing tree raises the AC bonus by 4 and then blocks one one attack (probably the best one) if it happens to land. So not only are you more likely to not get hit, if one gets through you can negate it. All for a -1 penalty to attack.
kyrt-ryder, you are right, I was thinking Deflect Arrows blocks an arrow rather than an actual attack.
Don't the remaining melee attacks have penalties too? However, my argument is more for a melee deflection alone isn't a big deal and should exist in the game.
Say you're getting hit by a Ranged Attacker. Has rapid shot, many shot, deadly aim, etc. At 6 BAB his attack sequence(without stats and other mods) is +4(MS)/+4/-3
A single weapon melee-r his attacking at +6/+1, and a TWF is attacking at +4/+4/-1, same as the ranged dude.
Being able to auto deflect one of these attacks amounts to the same thing. Maybe old Crane Wing was strong with it's other utility yes, stacking AC bonus atop might hurt, but I think auto melee deflection as a feat isn't any more game breaking.
I wonder how many people would whine about CW if it was instead a feat for shields. Sure, it would still be something nice for martials, but at least not Monks, so maybe more people would just begrudgingly tolerate it?
I once homwbrew a feat like that. Instead of deflecting the attack you trnasfomr it into a sunder attempt to the shield. yes, you avoid hte damage, but you risk losing the shield.
@LoneKnave - Having T-Rex used unarmed strikes to get past Crane Wing is a pretty creative solution. I think some groups would question whether T-Rex should be smart enough to think of it, but maybe a frustrated T-Rex would start kicking, tail slapping, or punching furiously with his tiny two fingered fists. I don't have a problem with it, but I'd imagine that my players might. I've sometimes had a monster facing Mirror Images make a successful Spellcraft roll and react by closing its eyes to get a 50% miss chance, and not every player agreed that was fair.
@Lemmy - To me your proposal to scale the AC bonus from Crane Wing with level/BAB seems fairly similar to Paizo’s errata. You'd mostly just be negotiating about the AC bonus except that you seem to doubt that getting an AC bonus of less than infinite will help at levels 12+. Is there something specific at those levels which worries you, perhaps Quickened True Strike? Would an AC bonus equal to BAB be satisfactory, or do you feel like it needs to be immunity to anything but a nat 20 to be worth taking? I’d think that regardless of how big or small the AC bonus is people would want the option to use it reactively.
Also, do you think it is important for the nat 20 to bypass the Crane Wing defense, or is that just a concession to help achieve compromise?
@Lemmy - To me your proposal to scale the AC bonus from Crane Wing with level/BAB seems fairly similar to Paizo’s errata. You'd mostly just be negotiating about the AC bonus except that you seem to doubt that getting an AC bonus of less than infinite will help at levels 12+. Is there something specific at those levels which worries you, perhaps Quickened True Strike? Would an AC bonus equal to BAB be satisfactory, or do you feel like it needs to be immunity to anything but a nat 20 to be worth taking? I’d think that regardless of how big or small the AC bonus is people would want the option to use it reactively.
It's not that I think an AC "less than infinity" wouldn't help, it's just that I think the feat was fine as it was, this is just me trying my hand at a compromise. Besides, if the character is getting a +20 or whatever anyway, might as well give him the ability to simply deflect one attack, it's easier to understand, faster to use in game and simpler to implement.
My version could still be used reactively and doesn't need a full defense. It's bonus is also not pretty much worthless after a couple levels. a +4 bonus might be okay at 4th level, but it's meh at 8th level, and pretty much insignificant at levels 12+, when attack bonuses start to quickly outpace AC and the vast majority of enemies either have the ability to make multiple attacks or don't rely on melee combat anyway.
Paizo didn't just nerf CW, they burned it to the ground. Now it's just yet another feat among the hundreds that never ever see use, as if martial classes didn't have enough trap options already. That's what annoys me the most.
Also, do you think it is important for the nat 20 to bypass the Crane Wing defense, or is that just a concession to help achieve compromise?
Just a concession. Honestly, if your enemy relies on melee attacks and can only hit you on a natural 20 (or even if it "only" needs a 18+), it's has never been a threat. CW or not.
Takes out his bow and arrow.So, let's say you're fine taking up your whole turn. Let's say the monk is up against a fifth level two-handed fighter, on total defense.
How does the fighter injure the monk?
This is a legit question, by the way. I'm curious. If there is a reasonable way, I'd probably revise my vote to #1.
At which point he's still stuck, since the dude is a melee warrior and probably hasn't taken Rapid Shot.
Readies an action to attack before he goes into defensive stance. Wins initiative.
So unless he wins Initiative against a fairly Dex-centric class, he's screwed?
Please ignore the stupid of the first statement. It's kinda dumb.
Unless the monk's also taken Deflect Arrows, but at that point, he's made enough of an investiture that I'm not gonna bother.
Tell me, what would a low level Fighter do against a flying opponent? Whatever it is, it probably applies against CW. Or are you suggesting 2 stryx with crossbows will indeed cause a TPk?
So, let's say you're fine taking up your whole turn. Let's say the monk is up against a fifth level two-handed fighter, on total defense.
How does the fighter injure the monk?
This is a legit question, by the way. I'm curious. If there is a reasonable way, I'd probably revise my vote to #1.
Ready an action to slam his face in when he has to use an action to get back into total defense or fighting defensively.
Oh wow, just saw the errata...thank GOD for this! This is a step in the right direction! Now just fix firearms, summoners, and give fighters 2 extra skill points and perception and this game will be balanced!
So, let's say you're fine taking up your whole turn. Let's say the monk is up against a fifth level two-handed fighter, on total defense.
How does the fighter injure the monk?
This is a legit question, by the way. I'm curious. If there is a reasonable way, I'd probably revise my vote to #1.
He could shoot him with a bow. Or throw a flask of acid at him (every fighter should have stuff like that.) He could even pick up stones and throw them at the monk. Eventually the monk will grow tired of being pelted with stones. And while the fighter can eat or drink between throwing the monk can't if he wants to stay in full defence.
And if it takes too long, the fighter can just move a away and find more interesting thinks to do. Like chopping trees and make them fall in the monk's direction. And once the monk is surrounded by felled trees, set them on fire.
Any of those options is at least as reasonable as the monk standing there in full defence.
The fighter could probably start digging a pit to bull rush the Monk into, and if the Monk ever attacks, the fighter could beat the Monk down with his shovel. Because he's badass like that.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Better yet, the fighter should just start digging under the Monk. Them wizards think they're so smart with their create pit spell...
Um, there is no ranged melee build. Either you're in reach, or you're not.
Awkward wording, apologies.
When you are making a melee attack against a non-adjacent creature, the rules for cover with ranged attacks come into play. That includes, among other things, soft cover. Hence, fighting 'over the shoulder of melee'. If you don't have default reach somehow, this can be done with the Lunge feat.Interesting note: that soft cover which provides an AC bonus also prevents attacks of opportunity. A ranged character having cover against a melee attack is a really good thing.
The vast majority of enemies do not have Improved Precise Shot. Only incredible dedicated missile guys get that, maybe 1% of all the enemies you will ever fight?
Compare said number to the number of foes who melee. 80%? 90%?
Putting aside the approximate veracity of your estimations, it is the case that some creatures and enemies use both methods of attacking. There's nothing to say you can't build enemies who have that as feats, either. RotRL has class levels applied to various giant as early as book 3. Even if you're running a pre-built module or AP, a GM should be expected to change certain things to provide a better challenge to their players. If they're not guarding themselves well against ranged assault, toss a few levels of archery-focused ranger or something onto some enemies and enjoy the results.
Crane Wing was beloved for a reason. Deflect Missile is ignored for a reason.
Maybe because GMs aren't mixing it up enough. I routinely use thrown alchemical items and poison tipped arrows backed by sneak damage against my players. The feat also works against alchemist bombs and bullets. i think averting a 4d10+4X dmg bullet crit or a 10d6+Int dmg bomb against you as a free action every round is pretty good, provided you're in a campaign where those sorts of things come up more than once in a blue moon.
Again, I agree, Crane Wing is more useful and a cooler feat overall. I started this thread, that's how surprised and chagrined I was that Paizo did such a terrible job of errating the feat. Ranged combat, however, is not the uber-weak fighting mode you seem to be hinting at. That's really all I'm saying. It's a bit more complicated, but it has perks over melee that will always make it an attractive option in this game.
Cerberus Seven, it isn't that Ranged Combat is a weak fighting mode. Rather, the opposite is true.
If a GM sends a dedicated group of ranged combatants at a party ill-equipped to handle ranged combat (which many, if not most are) then you get a TPK. Ranged Combat is uncommon, not weak and thus, Deflect Arrows is ignored.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a martial character forgets to pack a freaking longbow in a game where half the creatures can fly, he deserves to lose.
It is not that much that it is uncommon. I would say that the relevant factor is the number of attacks. The halfling antipaladin use smite good in his 4 ranged attacks (2 iteratives + rapid shot + haster), then you can vaid like a 1/4 of the damage with deflect arrow.
The halfling antipaladin spirit charge you for 3d6 +80 of dmg, you avoid all the damage.