You forgot the part where you sigh and then dramatically fling yourself down upon the ground to sob.
Hey, I like the old version too, bud. Nor am I changing it in the game I run. I'm not sure its loss ruins all unarmed fighters or monks ever though. I actually prefer Panther Style to Crane.
Lemmy, please try to understand the point here is the exchange. -1 attack for +1 AC (increased every 4 levels) is a poor exchange.
However a -1attack for +4AC is a much better exchange rate.
Most people would not use the -1:+1 exchange rate. Most people would use the -1:+4 exchange rate.
You invest something you get a better trade-off.
Combat expertise without any other investment is -1:+1 and is bad. With threatening defender it is -0:+1 at first level or (-n+1):+n. With threatening defender the penalty lessens by another 1 to -0:+2 at bab+4 or (-n+2):+n and now we are suddenly not that far away from -1:+4 (we could have -1:+3 for example).And on top of that the madu itself gives AC and it lessens the penalty for fighting defensively, too.
So far, changing Crane from the original version to the version I mentioned in another thread (exactly the same as the errata version except you decide after the attack roll is revealed and you don't get a free riposte unless you need the extra +4 to avoid the hit) has not affected our Crane Aldori Swordlord in our weekly game at all. Now, I'm the first to admit that she's due for a natural 20 against her one of these days, but so far, she has never had a round where there wasn't an attack that missed by less than 4 except when everything missed anyway.
I was completely not expecting that the errata was not going to affect her--I figured it would be a small but visible nerf, so I'm as surprised as you are.
@Rogue Eidolon - I'd be happy with being able to use the +4 AC as a reaction to being hit, kind of like Mounted Combat. If the +4 makes the attack miss you'd get the Riposte (if you had the feat for it). I think that's basically the same as what you're saying though.
I think the guaranteed dodge is important specifically BECAUSE it blocks natural 20's. If the witch can cover bad luck on her rolls with Misfortune then the Monk should be able to cover bad luck on her rolls with Crane Wing.
@Rogue Eidolon - I'd be happy with being able to use the +4 AC as a reaction to being hit, kind of like Mounted Combat. If the +4 makes the attack miss you'd get the Riposte (if you had the feat for it). I think that's basically the same as what you're saying though.
That's entirely right. I proposed it immediately as a minor change to the errata, and that's what we've been using. It's actually offensively much weaker because Rhiana doesn't get as many ripostes this way.
That would make crane riposte pretty useless, I think.
So far, changing Crane from the original version to the version I mentioned in another thread (exactly the same as the errata version except you decide after the attack roll is revealed and you don't get a free riposte unless you need the extra +4 to avoid the hit) has not affected our Crane Aldori Swordlord in our weekly game at all.
That is very different from the current rule tho. Glad your houserule works tho, I wouldn't mind something similar being incorporated into a 2nd errata.
Though honestly, I probably would prefer anything to what it currently stands as.
That would make crane riposte pretty useless, I think.
Well, given she's gotten all the Wings she would have gotten otherwise, it's been just as useful as it was before. As a Swordlord, she doesn't get the +1 to hit from Riposte, though, so it's a little less useful for her anyway. I think if we went with the official errata, she would have received a substantial offense upgrade by getting to use Riposte every round. Not that her offense isn't excellent already.
|
Well, given she's gotten all the Wings she would have gotten otherwise, it's been just as useful as it was before. As a Swordlord, she doesn't get the +1 to hit from Riposte, though, so it's a little less useful for her anyway. I think if we went with the official errata, she would have received a substantial offense upgrade by getting to use Riposte every round. Not that her offense isn't excellent already.
While this is a perfectly valid point, I believe what is upsetting many people about the change (myself included) is that we are seeing the only notable personal defense-centric style getting hosed. The riposte ability is fine and all, but we like and chose Crane for protection, not for an ok offensive option.
Dragon style is good offense. Panther style is good offense. Snake and Tiger are good offense. If we wanted stronger attack options we would have chosen one of those.
I will be the first to admit the protection from natural 20's was strong, but there is certainly a precedent for such an ability. Rather than being automatic 1/round out the gate at level 1 or two on some builds, however, instead give it a bare minimum level 7ish requirement that cannot be circumvented and charge 1 point of ki per use. That puts it on a limited resource, which brings it back in line with other similar re-roll and negation abilities.
instead give it a bare minimum level 7ish requirement and charge 1 point of ki per use.
So now literally only Monks and Ninjas can use it. That's pretty lame for all those Brawlers, Unarmed Fighters, Pugilist Barbarians, etc. that want to have a nice Feat.
And poor Martial Artist Monk. =(
May as well just say it has a requirement of Monk 4 if you're going that route, it amounts to the same thing.
Well, given she's gotten all the Wings she would have gotten otherwise, it's been just as useful as it was before. As a Swordlord, she doesn't get the +1 to hit from Riposte, though, so it's a little less useful for her anyway. I think if we went with the official errata, she would have received a substantial offense upgrade by getting to use Riposte every round. Not that her offense isn't excellent already.While this is a perfectly valid point, I believe what is upsetting many people about the change (myself included) is that we are seeing the only notable personal defense-centric style getting hosed. The riposte ability is fine and all, but we like and chose Crane for protection, not for an ok offensive option.
Dragon style is good offense. Panther style is good offense. Snake and Tiger are good offense. If we wanted stronger attack options we would have chosen one of those.
I will be the first to admit the protection from natural 20's was strong, but there is certainly a precedent for such an ability. Rather than being automatic 1/round out the gate at level 1 or two on some builds, however, instead give it a bare minimum level 7ish requirement that cannot be circumvented and charge 1 point of ki per use. That puts it on a limited resource, which brings it back in line with other similar re-roll and negation abilities.
Well, defensively our group's compromise seems to be empirically doing about as well as the original, at least for now (she's sure to be hit by a Nat20 soon), but I was suddenly struck with a crazy new idea for another compromise possibility. Tell me if I'm crazy, but I think this may be a good one:
What if it was a reroll, like all the other nat20 prevention? So you can't solo a one-attack enemy with high attack bonus any more because it will still hit you on a reroll, but you can prevent unlucky strikes (usually) by the reroll?
So it's basically a personal range only Divine Interference? Pass. Crane Wing's function is unique and should stay that way.
|
|
So now literally only Monks and Ninjas can use it. That's pretty lame for all those Brawlers, Unarmed Fighters, Pugilist Barbarians, etc. that want to have a nice Feat.
And poor Martial Artist Monk. =(
May as well just say it has a requirement of Monk 4 if you're going that route, it amounts to the same thing.
If making an effort for it to function as prior but using some sort of limited resource (which was one of the major complaints by those claiming it was too strong), it does impede progress toward that goal with Fighters having no limited resource attached to their class.
You could also perhaps consider the prospect of a stunning fist mechanic, some formula amounting to x times/day if you do not possess a ki pool.
So it's basically a personal range only Divine Interference? Pass. Crane Wing's function is unique and should stay that way.
Though on the other hand, Divine Interference requires 10th level, takes up an immediate action, expends a spell slot, and can only be used against the same target once per day (so it's much less effective against multi-round foes).
|
|
Well, defensively our group's compromise seems to be empirically doing about as well as the original, at least for now (she's sure to be hit by a Nat20 soon), but I was suddenly struck with a crazy new idea for another compromise possibility. Tell me if I'm crazy, but I think this may be a good one:
What if it was a reroll, like all the other nat20 prevention? So you can't solo a one-attack enemy with high attack bonus any more because it will still hit you on a reroll, but you can prevent unlucky strikes (usually) by the reroll?
I think part of the debate is also the breadth of builds that Crane Wing fond itself on. People who saw Crane Wing in action on a dumped, low, or mid AC character may have found it to be incredibly powerful because of the number of hits it absorbed. Other players, such as ourselves, only ever saw it used when a natural 20 came up, because the PC's armor classes were already so high that nothing was hitting them. Folks who witnessed Crane Wing on those such builds may have thought of it as a meh feat. When debating this feat in particular, perspective varies greatly by the builds folks who seen or used the feat with.
If you are referring to your awesome swashbuckler build (is that correct?), then I can absolutely see why your group would note little change in the defense. On a character like that, Crane Wing comes up about 5% of the time. That protection is mostly factor of AC however, and only partially from the Crane Style feat chain. So I am not sure that is a good indication of the feat chain being appropriately defense over offense focused or not.
As far as your Crane Wing proposal, I personally could be satisfied with a mechanic along those lines. I still continue to believe the nerf was wholly unnecessary however, so I am certainly biased. We have powerhouse offensive feats, and defensive feats of similar magnitude for spellcasters (again, divine interference).
|
|
So it's basically a personal range only Divine Interference? Pass. Crane Wing's function is unique and should stay that way.Though on the other hand, Divine Interference requires 10th level, takes up an immediate action, expends a spell slot, and can only be used against the same target once per day (so it's much less effective against multi-round foes).
That. While I also miss the old Crane Wing (mostly as it stood damn near alone as a defensive feat option of similar power to some of the insane offensive ones), it was very strong. Game breakingly strong? No, especially when we consider it's offensive opposites did not get toned down, and bottom line, it's not magic. But I would also not have been upset if they would have put some sort of tax on it, such as ki to use, or requiring an immediate action. We shouldn't have it all - especially rolled up into one feat (albeit, one feat at the end of a chain). There should be a balance between:
- What it does.
- How many pre-reqs it took to get it.
- Cost to use it.
- Action required to use.
A flat out negation should probably require an immediate action and a daily resource of some kind (ki, uses per day, ect.)
A re-roll, we could be a little more liberal with. Compared to Divine Interference, we couldn't use Crane Wing to deflect for a friend, so that could either allow us to get away with no cost per use or not using up an immediate action.
The vast majority of the overkill offense feats have a tax of some sort (with the notable exception of Clustered Shots). I see no reason why a defense feat can't be great with a tax as well.
Well, defensively our group's compromise seems to be empirically doing about as well as the original, at least for now (she's sure to be hit by a Nat20 soon), but I was suddenly struck with a crazy new idea for another compromise possibility. Tell me if I'm crazy, but I think this may be a good one:
What if it was a reroll, like all the other nat20 prevention? So you can't solo a one-attack enemy with high attack bonus any more because it will still hit you on a reroll, but you can prevent unlucky strikes (usually) by the reroll?
I think part of the debate is also the breadth of builds that Crane Wing fond itself on. People who saw Crane Wing in action on a dumped, low, or mid AC character may have found it to be incredibly powerful because of the number of hits it absorbed. Other players, such as ourselves, only ever saw it used when a natural 20 came up, because the PC's armor classes were already so high that nothing was hitting them. Folks who witnessed Crane Wing on those such builds may have thought of it as a meh feat. When debating this feat in particular, perspective varies greatly by the builds folks who seen or used the feat with.
If you are referring to your awesome swashbuckler build (is that correct?), then I can absolutely see why your group would note little change in the defense. On a character like that, Crane Wing comes up about 5% of the time. That protection is mostly factor of AC however, and only partially from the Crane Style feat chain. So I am not sure that is a good indication of the feat chain being appropriately defense over offense focused or not.
As far as your Crane Wing proposal, I personally could be satisfied with a mechanic along those lines. I still continue to believe the nerf was wholly unnecessary however, so I am certainly biased. We have powerhouse offensive feats, and defensive feats of similar magnitude for spellcasters (again, divine interference).
Rhiana the Swashbuckler was a rebuild of the character for the playtest (in the real game, she's an Aldori Swordlord). Actually, of the three, the one that she continually gets massive use out of is the first one, Crane Style (+2 to hit and +1 AC, assuming she always fights defensively, making fighting defensively a -0 to hit +6 AC prospect). However, actually no, it isn't that she can only be hit on a 20--our version of Wing (+4 after the roll is made) has saved her bacon quite a few times so far (even though nobody managed to 20 her yet that I remember since the errata). While her AC is over 40 in a level 14 party, we fight opponents who can hit that AC. But it turns out that if the enemy has enough attacks per round and the ability to hit you with non-20s, they are much more likely to hit you with an attack that the retroactive +4 can counter each round or miss you every time. I can do some math to show this, but I'm guessing you've already done it in your head now that I put it this way. I know you know this stuff well. It's just something I hadn't considered until I saw it in action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So it's basically a personal range only Divine Interference? Pass. Crane Wing's function is unique and should stay that way.Though on the other hand, Divine Interference requires 10th level, takes up an immediate action, expends a spell slot, and can only be used against the same target once per day (so it's much less effective against multi-round foes).
It also worked on anything, reached out to 30', imposed an additional attack roll penalty, doesn't have multiple feat prereqs, doesn't require you have one hand free or not be flat-footed, etc. And honestly, how many times is that 'once per day per creature' restriction going to really doom someone in your party?
Don't get me wrong, Divine Interference is great, I use it on my jade Regent cleric all the time. I just don't see either of these feats, pre-nerf, breaking a game.
|
|
Rhiana the Swashbuckler was a rebuild of the character for the playtest (in the real game, she's an Aldori Swordlord). Actually, of the three, the one that she continually gets massive use out of is the first one, Crane Style (+2 to hit and +1 AC, assuming she always fights defensively, making fighting defensively a -0 to hit +6 AC prospect). However, actually no, it isn't that she can only be hit on a 20--our version of Wing (+4 after the roll is made) has saved her bacon quite a few times so far (even though nobody managed to 20 her yet that I remember since the errata). While her AC is over 40 in a level 14 party, we fight opponents who can hit that AC. But it turns out that if the enemy has enough attacks per round and the ability to hit you with non-20s, they are much more likely to hit you with an attack that the retroactive +4 can counter each round or miss you every time. I can do some math to show this, but I'm guessing you've already done it in your head now that I put it this way. I know you know this stuff well. It's just something I hadn't considered until I saw it in action.
Oh yeah, Crane Style (the feat, not the chain) is amazing for any build that plans to incorporate fighting defensively. I don't believe anyone is complaining about that feat. I personally care so little for the riposte that the only reason I took the feat on my monk was for the additional attack penalty reduction and for role-playing purpose (hard to be a style "master" without the full chain).
I understand your point regarding the retroactive +4 vs. preliminary +4, and I agree with you in direct comparison with one to the other. I personally just find that entire "add 4 vs. one attack" mechanic lack-luster, and also of no benefit to extreme end high AC characters. So I prefer to see other options considered. If we are going to be stuck with something in that general ballpark though, I personally would prefer to just see a bland scaling up of the fighting defensively bonuses.
So it's basically a personal range only Divine Interference? Pass. Crane Wing's function is unique and should stay that way.Though on the other hand, Divine Interference requires 10th level, takes up an immediate action, expends a spell slot, and can only be used against the same target once per day (so it's much less effective against multi-round foes).It also worked on anything, reached out to 30', imposed an additional attack roll penalty, doesn't have multiple feat prereqs, doesn't require you have one hand free or not be flat-footed, etc. And honestly, how many times is that 'once per day per creature' restriction going to really doom someone in your party?
Don't get me wrong, Divine Interference is great, I use it on my jade Regent cleric all the time. I just don't see either of these feats, pre-nerf, breaking a game.
You actually do have to not be flat-footed to use an immediate action.
As to the restriction of once per day per creature? Oddly, we also have a cleric with Divine Interference in the same Kingmaker party, and in the very last encounter we had, we lost the Falchion Fighter because of the restriction. The cleric was like "Nope, I save him again this round too," and then the Druid player reminded him about the once per day thing.
Ok, fair point about the flat-footed = no immediate. Still more requirements on Crane Wing overall. I've never had the problem with needing to use it a second time, so I guess 'very seldom' is a fair estimate overall.
Ok, fair point about the flat-footed = no immediate. Still more requirements on Crane Wing overall. I've never had the problem with needing to use it a second time, so I guess 'very seldom' is a fair estimate overall.
Hmm, I don't know. I don't have much data on Divine Interference because we just got that cleric recently and she's only used it the one fight (and the restriction came up; also she wasn't happy to lose her Quickened spells either for the DI). However, on the nearly-identical Dual-Cursed Oracle Misfortune Revelation, I have more data points, and I've seen the restriction come up pretty much every session.
I've been trying to gather more data for a while on our version of the new Crane. I don't like to generalize without more data, so for now, in terms of that clause of DI, now that we have a DI cleric, I'll collect more data on Divine Interference and come back later to share it, maybe in a few months.
Always good to discuss with you and Lormyr though. Cheers!
In support of Rogue Eidolon's observations I'll mention that in another Kingmaker game my fairly high AC Paladin/Bard has been saved from many nat 20s by Misfortune, and we've seen the once per enemy restriction come up fairly often.