| 25 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the errata. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Pummeling Style feat from the Advanced Class Guide says ""
Does this mean it can't be used with two-weapon fighting, flurry of blows, brawler's flurry, and similar abilities? It uses the exact same wording as Spring Attack and similar feats, which definitely don't combine with much.
What about Power Attack and other abilities that augment attacks? Can they be used with Pummeling Style?
This thread for FAQing and discussing.
I'd think that RAI would mean it only works with unarmed attacks, since it has a prerequisite of Improved Unarmed Strike. But I wouldn't rule out any monk weapons or weapons that a brawler could use in a flurry.
It says explicitly that you make "a number of rolls equal to the number of attacks with a full attack or flurry of blows", so flurry of blows is definitely in. Bralwler's Flurry seems to be out. As for haste, the question is open, how this deals with changing number of attacks.
Reasoning: If I am hasted, the number of attacks I can make with a full-attack is higher than when I am not. Hence, since I am to roll as often as I can attack with a full-attack, I make the higher number of rolls.
Counterclaim: When the ability reference the number of attacks I can make with a full-attack it means something like "can normally make" or "can make, based on class abilities alone".
I find the option "reasoning" more plausible.
That has nothing to do with the question I asked, aceDiamond and Ssalarn.
I hadn't even considered haste, KutuluKultist. Thanks for bringing it up. An interesting point to be sure.
*bump*
Pummeling style is a unique full-round action, not a modification to a typical full-attack. Just like Vital Strike is its own unique Standard Action, and combines with nothing (or close to it), Pummeling Strike is in the same boat.
The Pummeling charge feat, with Horn of the Criosphinx, and Dragon Ferocity. Unarmed strike damage plus STR x2.5 for all attacks on the charge? If you work it right, you can get this psuedo-pounce at Level 8, maybe earlier (not certain the build, it is late and I am tired.)
Probably not. Remember, pummeling style is a style feat, so you can't use dragon style with it (unless you are a MoMS monk; either you are only using 3/4 BAB regular full attacks, or you only dipped to mix styles, and thus you delay when you can qualify for this feat)
The Pummeling charge feat, with Horn of the Criosphinx, and Dragon Ferocity. Unarmed strike damage plus STR x2.5 for all attacks on the charge? If you work it right, you can get this psuedo-pounce at Level 8, maybe earlier (not certain the build, it is late and I am tired.)Probably not. Remember, pummeling style is a style feat, so you can't use dragon style with it (unless you are a MoMS monk; either you are only using 3/4 BAB regular full attacks, or you only dipped to mix styles, and thus you delay when you can qualify for this feat)
MoMS 2/Brawler X :P
My money is on MoMS 2/ Warpriest (Sacred Fist) X
prototype00
MoMS 2/Brawler X :PThe Pummeling charge feat, with Horn of the Criosphinx, and Dragon Ferocity. Unarmed strike damage plus STR x2.5 for all attacks on the charge? If you work it right, you can get this psuedo-pounce at Level 8, maybe earlier (not certain the build, it is late and I am tired.)Probably not. Remember, pummeling style is a style feat, so you can't use dragon style with it (unless you are a MoMS monk; either you are only using 3/4 BAB regular full attacks, or you only dipped to mix styles, and thus you delay when you can qualify for this feat)
Can you grab pummeling charge with MoMS? I am quite honestly ignorant if it is labeled as applicable. If he can, then I suppose it is possible (grabbing dragon style feats normally). Although few GMs will appreciate pounce at level 2.
If he can't grab them with MoMS, then he has to wait since the prerequisites are monk 8, brawler 8, or BAB +12. So that would be level 10 for monk/brawler (can you multiclass monk and brawler? I seem to remember some restriction about that, but I am unsure if it is still in palce) or level 13 with monk 2/full BAB class 11.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The multiclass restriction was removed in the ACG.
1) MoMS (Dragon Style), Feat of Choice
2) Brawler
3) Brawler (Pummeling Charge)
4) MoMS (Pummeling Charge)
5) Brawler (Dragon Ferocity)
Now, go forth and Kick Ass!
Screw MoMS, with the charge feat its a single attack so go lance mounted combat. Its buffed lancepouncing.
We're kind of assuming that the ability to use weapons will be errat'd.
I'm surprised more people aren't FAQing this. I guess it's pretty clear that it doesn't stack with anything except flurry of blows then?
The multiclass restriction was removed in the ACG.
1) MoMS (Dragon Style), Feat of Choice
2) Brawler
3) Brawler (Pummeling Charge)
4) MoMS (Pummeling Charge)
5) Brawler (Dragon Ferocity)Now, go forth and Kick Ass!
What's the point of getting it so early if you have no iterative attacks with which to use it? It doesn't look like it can be used with brawler's flurry, and master of many styles gives up flurry of blows.
What's the point of getting it early if you only get one attack? It doesn't look like it can be used with brawler's flurry, and master of many styles gives up flurry of blows.The multiclass restriction was removed in the ACG.
1) MoMS (Dragon Style), Feat of Choice
2) Brawler
3) Brawler (Pummeling Charge)
4) MoMS (Pummeling Charge)
5) Brawler (Dragon Ferocity)Now, go forth and Kick Ass!
Oh, I'm aware. The feat is clunky (as are several in this book) and needs to be clarified to work properly and as intended.
I'm guessing the intention is to only function with unarmed strikes, and with brawler's flurry/flurry of blows etc.
Personally, I will never play a Brawler, so the whole mini build above is kind of pointless. But if I were to play one, the above is probably a strong contender.
Why wouldn't you ever play a brawler?
Why wouldn't you ever play a brawler?
I feel the Brawler steps on the Monks toes way too much. The Monk is one of my favorite classes, so when I did the playtest and saw the Brawler got, like everything that wasn't Ki fueled on the Monk, really annoyed the hell out of me.
Even worse, in the playtest at least, some of his abilities were superior to the Monks. Like the Brawler being given TWF in his Flurry instead of being similar to TWF. Or how the Brawler's DR bypass was superior to the Monks because he was capable of choosing the alignment bypass.
But, basically, he gets Monk Unarmed Dice, Monk AC bonus (delayed), Monk skills, Monk skill points, Monk DR bypass, Monk flurry, he's treated as a Monk for Monk access to feats etc.
I strongly argued for different mechanics for the Brawler so he had a lot more different abilities. I really wish the Brawler had more unique mechanics to himself instead of just ripping off the Monk so much.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pummeling style is a unique full-round action, not a modification to a typical full-attack. Just like Vital Strike is its own unique Standard Action, and combines with nothing (or close to it), Pummeling Strike is in the same boat.
But unlike Dead Shot, Pummeling Style "inherits" a Full Attack through the phrase "Make a number of rolls equal to the number of attacks you can make with a full attack". It's not stated or even implied that this means "iteratives only".
That means that Haste effects, Two-weapon Fighting etc are all legit. You may not be making a Full Attack, but the question isn't "what's your BAB?", it's "how many attacks, and at which bonus, can you make during a full attack?". Technically, there's a distinction between a Pummeling Style blow and a Full Attack, but it's a very fine crack that will rarely be relevant.
As for whether the BAB increase from Flurry of Blows applies...the feat doesn't explicitly say that it applies. But if it doesn't, a 6th level Monk will have an attack bonus of $UNDEFINED on one of his attacks.
In other words, two possible interpretations:
1) BAB increase from FoB is not intended to apply. This can be derived from a careful reading of the feat and the class ability. This makes FoB apply partially, and creates attacks with an undefined attack bonus.
2) BAB increase from FoB is intended to apply, and the writer thought that this was obvious and didn't need mentioning.
In the interest of sanity and consistency with Paizo writers' previous writing style, it seems obvious to me that 1) is not the correct interpretation.
|
I have to say, I like the flavor of martial monk that the brawler is. And I would love to see flurry of blows errata'd to use the same mechanics as the brawler's flurry.
Given the wording used on pummeling style, I have a couple thoughts about the strangeness here.
The benefits section specifically says "one devastating punch."
So I think the cumulative damage is delivered via that subset of unarmed strike.
Here's where it gets weird.
You make a number of rolls equal to the number of attacks you can make with a full attack, or a flurry of blows. Ok. This wording implies that if you were wielding two shortswords with three attacks each, you'd roll six attacks to hit, and total up the "normal" damage. (I'll come back to this.)
Ok. Here it's basically working like clustered shots.
If ANY of the attack rolls are critical threats, you roll once to confirm at your highest bab. If it succeeds, the entire attack is a confirmed critical hit. Ok.
So, let's say I'm a titan mauler barb wielding a scythe in one hand, and wielding a kukri in my off-hand. The kukri crits, and now I get my x4 scythe crit damage. This is delicious, but very strong. But ok, let's roll with it.
Now, all that damage is delivered via a punch. It's specifically a punch in the benefits section. So, do we HAVE to have a free hand to make this attack? If we're fighting with a temple sword, do we need to drop it to deliver the attack? Or, if we don't HAVE a free hand to punch with, does the ability fail?
Clearly, the ability is delivered through a punch. So, do you apply the +5 from your +5 scythe to overcome damage reduction? Or does your damage suddenly suffer from dr/magic because you don't wear an AOMF?
Now, let's revisit the above comment. "Normal" damage. Does normal damage include precision damage like sneak attack? How about damage bonuses from things like hammer the gap, that deal additional damage on multiple hits? How about something like elemental fist damage? I'd like to think that normal means all the damage you'd deal if you were making the same attack routine without using pummeling fist.
I think Ravingdork's right. There's something worth discussing here.
Punch isn't a defined game term. In the english language it means a thrusting blow (think hole punch). So as written it applies to all weapons and you attack with whatever weapon you wish for that one attack. If they meant unarmed attack, they're going to have to scratch out punch and replace it with unarmed attack.
Hmm, or for a Scout Rogue, a much easier way than dazzling display/shatter defenses to get a foe flat-footed for a full attack.
prototype00
Why wouldn't you ever play a brawler?I feel the Brawler steps on the Monks toes way too much. The Monk is one of my favorite classes, so when I did the playtest and saw the Brawler got, like everything that wasn't Ki fueled on the Monk, really annoyed the hell out of me.
Even worse, in the playtest at least, some of his abilities were superior to the Monks. Like the Brawler being given TWF in his Flurry instead of being similar to TWF. Or how the Brawler's DR bypass was superior to the Monks because he was capable of choosing the alignment bypass.
But, basically, he gets Monk Unarmed Dice, Monk AC bonus (delayed), Monk skills, Monk skill points, Monk DR bypass, Monk flurry, he's treated as a Monk for Monk access to feats etc.
I strongly argued for different mechanics for the Brawler so he had a lot more different abilities. I really wish the Brawler had more unique mechanics to himself instead of just ripping off the Monk so much.
There are items that change you alignment for the purposes of DR with monks. I think they are some kind of prayer wheels. One is covered in hymns, the other in heavy metal lyrics (I guess). One item makes you count as good, the other makes you count as evil. Just meditate with the appropriate wheel 1/day, and you are good (or evil) to go. And with the option to stay lawful, you cover everything except DR/chaotic (which is not exactly common). Not to mention the fact that pummeling style is meant to make all this moot (DR 20 applied over 9 hits is basically DR 2)
I also like this martial flexibility thing they added in after play test, which lets you basically just grab any combat feat you qualify for a minute (and you can switch which one you gain for free during that minute) for x times/day.
While people might think them a straight upgrade over monk....I kind of thought the same thing with sohei monks.....
Punch isn't a defined game term. In the english language it means a thrusting blow (think hole punch). So as written it applies to all weapons and you attack with whatever weapon you wish for that one attack. If they meant unarmed attack, they're going to have to scratch out punch and replace it with unarmed attack.
I am going to give the same evidence to argue this that I gave to you in another pummeling thread-
Unarmed Attacks
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:
There is some argument about whether things like brassknuckles or a cestus count (I lean no, since you can't apply unarmed strike damage dice to them, but that is just me; doesn't necessarily change too much of the argument that is to come), but the fact remains that a punch is a type of unarmed strike. If I said 'I throw a punch' in a game, I mean 'I use an unarmed strike'.
Just because it isn't given its own weapon listing doesn't mean it isn't defined in game. And just because you don't like it doesn't mean that it isn't RAW.
Now for the funnier parts of my argument (this is me arguing from the already insane perspective of 'use anything', so of course it is flawed; still brings up good points), given that you need to deliver this via a punch, and that you need a free hand to do that specific kind of unarmed strike, I would argue that you can't make this with 2 handed weapons, 1 handed weapons being 2 handed, or with a second weapon in that hand while doing TWF (this bit is where the argument about brassknuckles comes in; you still can't do double kukris at least; I do at least some good in this world).
I would also argue that you need to wield a weapon in order use it for pummeling style, and that changing your stance during the middle of a full attack so you can make a different type of attack is generally not allowed, so just 'hold greatsword, take hand off greatsword, deliver punch' doesn't work. If you let go of the weapon before you perform the full round action, you are not considered to be wielding it.
I'll also say the same thing I said in the other thread. Punch is the fluff you can add to the actual weapon, the unarmed attack. Slashing or stabbing with your longsword doesn't alter the mechanics of the longsword.
Punch just isn't a weapon, it's a description of an attack (a thrusting blow). Your dagger can punch right through some armor as easy as you can punch someone with a fist.
It's hard to break a mechanic that isn't there. Like using iterative attacks on a pounce
It's hard to break a mechanic that isn't there. Like using iterative attacks on a pounce
I don't get what you're saying. You can make iterative attacks on a pounce.
"When a creature with this special attack makes a charge, it can make a full attack"
"Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones."
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Pummeling Style feat from the Advanced Class Guide says ""
Does this mean it can't be used with two-weapon fighting, flurry of blows, brawler's flurry, and similar abilities? It uses the exact same wording as Spring Attack and similar feats, which definitely don't combine with much.
What about Power Attack and other abilities that augment attacks? Can they be used with Pummeling Style?
This thread for FAQing and discussing.
As a full-round action, you can pool all your attack potential in one devastating punch. Make a number of rolls equal to the number of attacks you can make with a full attack or a flurry of blows (your choice) with the normal attack bonus for each attack. For each roll that is a hit, you deal the normal amount of damage, adding it to any damage the attack has already dealt from previous rolls (if any). If any of the attack rolls are critical threats, make one confirmation roll for the entire attack at your highest base attack bonus. If it succeeds, the entire attack is a confirmed critical hit.So, you roll as many attacks you can make with a full attack or flurry of blows. Right there, it definitely works with flurry. Then, look at Two-Weapon Fighting rules.
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.
So, the number of attacks you make in a full attack increases by 1. The ITWF and GTWF feats are similarly worded, each one giving an extra attack at a penalty. Haste gives you 1 additional attack in a full attack. So, a hasted GTWFer with a full BAB can make 8 attacks in a full attack. When using Pummeling Style, you'd get 8 "attacks" because 8 is currently the number of attacks you can make in a full attack. At least, that's how I read it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Punch isn't a defined game term. In the english language it means a thrusting blow (think hole punch).
In colloquial english, in the context of combat, it means a thrusting blow with a clenched fist. You know this perfectly well, and your dictionary quote is dishonest.
So as written it applies to all weapons and you attack with whatever weapon you wish for that one attack. If they meant unarmed attack, they're going to have to scratch out punch and replace it with unarmed attack.
As written right now, the super obvious intent of "unarmed strikes only" is not actually encoded in the feat text. So if you have a RAW GM who also is the kind of person who interprets "RAW" as "semantics is the only valid analytical tool", then sure, go ahead and use it with armed attacks. But stop pretending you don't know how the feat is intended to work, it's just a sad display.
I was referencing the old argument of can you do iterative attacks on a Pounce. people thought it was breaking the mechanics of a pounce to do so. But turns out it was allowed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously the brawler is supposed to be limited to hand tools when using the ability.
Come on folks, they call out punching 3 different times in that feat. Its for unarmed strikes only, you know that.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unarmed Strikes don't have to be punches. They can be kicks, or headbutts, or shoulder checks, or whatever else.
An attack with a cestus or the brass knuckles, however, is always a punch.
Ergo, this feat only works with cesti or brass knuckles and anyone who says otherwise is a dirty cheating munchkin and how dare you expect the monk to have nice things.
Unarmed Strikes don't have to be punches. They can be kicks, or headbutts, or shoulder checks, or whatever else.
An attack with a cestus or the brass knuckles, however, is always a punch.
Ergo, this feat only works with cesti or brass knuckles and anyone who says otherwise is a dirty cheating munchkin and how dare you expect the monk to have nice things.
And my spiked gauntlets deal unarmed damage because it says "allowing the wearer to stab with the force of a punch". It's totally clear since punch = unarmed attack/damage!
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Obviously the brawler is supposed to be limited to hand tools when using the ability.
Come on folks, they call out punching 3 different times in that feat. Its for unarmed strikes only, you know that.
No no, they can still use party refreshments too.
Or a puppet! (see punch and judy)
|
It's safest just to assume it means Unarmed Strikes only.
That way, if they later errata/FAQ is and say "all weapons are okay!" you can start using weapons with it. But if they errata/FAQ it and say "unarmed (and maybe close weapons) only!" and your Nodachi build is suddenly not only more powerful than intended, but it's against the rules, too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or a puppet! (see punch and judy)
....that is the only one I am going to accept here (assuming it is the type that you put your hand in; I would hate to see you argue that a string puppet counts as a reach weapon)
Would this end up being the favored weapon of Banjo?
I'm surprised more people aren't FAQing this. I guess it's pretty clear that it doesn't stack with anything except flurry of blows then?
It says "Make a number of rolls equal to the number of attacks you can make with a full attack"
So by my reading it actually stacks with a lot of stuff, because things like haste and TWF effect the number of attacks you can make with a full attack.
The wording very notably uses the term "number of attacks you can make with a full attack" and not "Number of attacks you can make based on your BAB". Which seems to honestly make it pretty clear to me that it stacks with a lot of s~*#.
Brawler's Flurry is still out though, which does not seem RAI.
It uses the exact same wording as Spring Attack
It doesn't though. Spring Attack explicitly calls out that you only make one attack with it. Pummeling Style doesn't have that degree of specificity.
Its for unarmed strikes only, you know that.
It never mentions unarmed strikes. It just says you deliver the attack with a punch.
So you swing your greatsword around and then punch someone for 2d6+ 1.5 strength slashing damage X times.
Admittedly, that's mostly silliness because Paizo is going to nerf it beyond all recognition sooner rather than later.
I'll also say the same thing I said in the other thread. Punch is the fluff you can add to the actual weapon, the unarmed attack. Slashing or stabbing with your longsword doesn't alter the mechanics of the longsword.
Punch just isn't a weapon, it's a description of an attack (a thrusting blow). Your dagger can punch right through some armor as easy as you can punch someone with a fist.
The longsword isnt a good example because it does change the mechanics because according to damage type rules and having more than 2 types of damage, u have to pick either slashing or piercing which according to whch creature u fight does alter the mechanics as in how much damage is done due to DR.
It never mentions unarmed strikes
Benefit: When using Pummeling Style, you can charge
and make a Pummeling Style attack at the end of yourcharge as part of the charge action.
Pummeling Style (Combat, Style)
You collect all your power into a single vicious and
debilitating punch.
Okay, let's clear up a couple things.
1) I don't think anyone disagrees that the original intent was almost certainly for Pummeling Style to only apply to unarmed strikes.
2) The closest the actual feat text comes to saying that is mentioning a punch, which is a somewhat ambiguous term. Not all punches are unarmed strikes, and not all unarmed strikes are punches.
Sure, we can just roll with what Paizo probably meant for now, but ideally the rules should be explicit.
Id rule u can do it with anything that allows u to punch. Unarmed attacks, punching dagger, and anything thing else that calls out u are "punching" with the weapon.