Dreamscarred Press Announces: Path of War Expanded!


Product Discussion

901 to 950 of 1,152 << first < prev | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

Personally, I don't see the big deal for either of these feats. Yeah, they're really good. I'm okay with that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I didn't realize a Warlord who used his bonus teamwork feat to grab Paired Opportunist, took one stance at 5th level, and grabbed Golden Lion Style was a "Group-wide build."

It takes just one guy to break break Golden Lion style. Then again, I guess realizing it just takes one guy to do all the work is an example of high optimization isn't it?

Piercing Thunder Style is less broken, but still pretty messed up.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Insain Dragoon wrote:

I didn't realize a Warlord who used his bonus teamwork feat to grab Paired Opportunist, took one stance at 5th level, and grabbed Golden Lion Style was a "Group-wide build."

It takes just one guy to break break Golden Lion style. Then again, I guess realizing it just takes one guy to do all the work is an example of high optimization isn't it?

Piercing Thunder Style is less broken, but still pretty messed up.

And Paired Opportunists really just makes a good thing better. I had a polearm wielding Warder with Golden Lion Style mixed in with a group of other pregens for a pick-up game last night down at the game store, alongside a druid, a warpriest of Shelyn, a stalker, and an Unchained summoner. Despite the fact that I gave exactly 0 advice on how to play the characters, it took about 30 seconds for the group to realize that their best tactic was herding enemies into flanking with the Warder with summon monster or summon nature's ally spells. The Warder was consistently able to use at least 3, if not all 6, of his AoOs, and he didn't have Paired Opportunists or other AoO generating abilities outside of Golden Lion Style and his base class abilities.

What was kind of crazy was how ridiculously easy it became to set up flanks against larger opponents. Against a trio of ogre brutes, the Warder was able to use his marks and his reach to create a scenario where he was flanking 2 different ogres with 2 different allies each, consistently generating at least 1 (often a whole flurry of 3) AoOs off of each of the summoned leopards, and usually able to provide flanking with the warpriest and/or stalker as well, thanks to the warpriest's reach and the stalker's mobility.
So a group of random players with non-min/maxed characters and no help from me, figured out immediately that they could deal a huge amount efficiently without using any of the tricks to boost the damage even further, like Paired Opportunists, Seize the Opportunity, etc.

The idea that it takes high system mastery to break the feat is just incorrect. If you've got the feat, an ability to generate multiple AoOs like Combat Reflexes or the Warder's built in options, and even a semblance of teamwork in the group, you can break it. The larger opponents get, the more legal squares you can flank from with a reach weapon, the easier it gets to generate those extra attacks, so all by itself the feat is getting stronger and stronger, before you even calculate in the many ways to jack it up even further, like stances and feats that let you threaten with any adjacent, Paired Opportunists that lets you multiply the AoOs generated in the group if you have a Warlord, Vizier, Inquisitor, Cavalier, or any other class or archetype capable of easily obtaining/sharing teamwork feats (there's a lot of them), Seize the Opportunity or anything else that helps you increase the potency of your AoOs, etc.


Ummm... First, if your using Golden Commander Stance to flank the enemy when your adjacent to them an an ally... your activating Tactical Flanker, which means you'll likely be getting a +3/+4 bonus to attack. So that actually REDUCES the chances of your ally missing. Very intelligent method of letting you use Golden Lion Style, decreasing the chance of actually using it.

Second, Paired Opportunist doesn't actually require any flanking at all, it simply requires you to be adjacent to your ally. So Golden Commander Stance doesn't actually help you with it. Sure, you activate Tactical Flanker if you do... but we went over how that might not actually be helpful for you.

Third, if this is just one guy. Might I point out that 'Warleader', which I assume your using to grant your ally Paired Opportunist, takes a standard action to activate? An entire standard action! That's on top of the two swift actions it costs to go into Golden Commander Stance, and then Golden Commander Style. Which is a lot of actions that could be used in other ways... like for example, actually hitting the enemy?

And even, EVEN if it didn't have that flaws... what would the combo really let you do? Its let you turn a miss, into two attacks against the enemy? Yes, fine sure that's great and all... but your ally already missed an attack, it doesn't seem very likely to me that they'll actually be able to hit with the attack... and even then, your losing out on your only AoO that turn, (because you know, you didn't actually say the Warlord gets Combat Reflexes)


Aaaaand I got ninja'd, great.

Yes, fine. Golden Lion Style opens up an effective party tactic. Considering that we're talking about Golden Lion, which is ALL about the party, that seems very valid to me in all honestly.

But just because is an EFFECTIVE tactic, doesn't mean it is an OVERPOWERED tactic. Golden Lion Style is a feat that rewards clever movements, and tactical teamwork play, all by itself. What other feat does that? What other feat actually supports teamwork and a party wide tactic? Teamwork feats requires others to have, or for class abilities to share them. There's no other feat like Golden Lion Style, and THAT's why it needs to stay. Its unquie and fits Golden Lion like a glove.

Is it a strong feat? Yes, it is. I'm not denying that. Golden Lion Style is an very powerful feat that has very powerful combinations with it. But does that make it an overpowered feat? Does it make it a Sacred Geometry level feat? Heck no! Why? Because to be able to use it effectively, it requires you to work as a team with your group! Sacred Geometry is an insane feat that just gives insane power to metamagic. Golden Lion Style rewards tactical play, but it order to us at these high tiers, requires party-wide investment.

Golden Lion Style is FINE. Powerful, but not overly so.

I mean seriously, if it was such a problem. Why on earth has people only now started complaining about it? When we are so soon to the end of the playest, and its been around for several months already?


...Unless I'm massively mistaken, the current version of Golden Lion Style was added fairly recently?

Massively mistaken indeed, never mind. I actually commented on the potential summon monster abuse potential for GLS back in early June. Though I went with the rather more humble D3 dire rat attacks rather than the full glory that is the celestial eagle whiffing battalion. :)

I like the idea behind the feat, but I think Ssalarn has a very legitimate concern.

What if we keep the mechanics of the feat as is, but limit it to one extra attack each round, or one attack per ally? Still a useful feat, but less prone to the d4+1 celestial eagle approach granting you 3d4+3* AoOs each round.

*Averages out to 10 AoOs, which is not an unreasonable amount for something like a mid-level dex-based initiatior. My 7th level warlord is currently sitting at six AoOs each round.


I'd rather not open the bag of worms and just see Golden Lion Style do something completely different than what it does now.

Community Manager

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Removed some posts and their replies. Please don't bring in issues with other forums onto this one—we've got quite enough to deal with here. In addition, please don't be insulting towards other posters; it doesn't help foster the kind of community we want on our boards.


Apparently stating that opinions on other forums due to the publishers being long time posters there and they having similar beliefs regarding game balance deserves post removal... :(


Fury of the Tempest wrote:


Golden Lion Style is FINE. Powerful, but not overly so.

I mean seriously, if it was such a problem. Why on earth has people only now started complaining about it? When we are so soon to the end of the playest, and its been around for several months already?

The current version of Piercing Thunder Style was released 6 days ago.....

As for Golden Lion Style

I am just one man trying to cover everything in my spare time. Sometimes I miss things.


Limiting Golden Lion Style to 1 proc per round would make it absolutely worthless. Making it as one proc per ally would would, but I doubt people would like it as they'll still scream about summoned monsters and multiple summoned monsters all attack at once to proc extra AoO's. Even if it still a big investment of resources (don't summoned monsters die like, instantly?). So... isn't there a way to word it so that summoned monsters don't activate it? I mean, that would silence most complaints right?


Or we can stop trying to find a way to make it not broken yet not useless and instead throw it back to the drawing board.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fury of the Tempest wrote:


****
But just because is an EFFECTIVE tactic, doesn't mean it is an OVERPOWERED tactic. Golden Lion Style is a feat that rewards clever movements, and tactical teamwork play, all by itself. What other feat does that? What other feat actually supports teamwork and a party wide tactic?

Literally every teamwork feat in existence.

Quote:


Teamwork feats requires others to have, or for class abilities to share them.

Which is one of the things that keeps them balanced despite being some of the strongest feats in the game.

Quote:


There's no other feat like Golden Lion Style, and THAT's why it needs to stay. Its unquie and fits Golden Lion like a glove.

There's no other feat like Golden Lion Style because most designers would see that it's horrifically overpowered, allowing you to easily tack on additional attacks that can outpace a characters standard full attack damage, while still allowing him to make said full attack.

Quote:
Is it a strong feat? Yes, it is. I'm not denying that. Golden Lion Style is an very powerful feat that has very powerful combinations with it.

It's an incredibly strong and easily leveraged feat that can double, or even more than double, a character's DPR.

Quote:


But does that make it an overpowered feat?

Yes.

Quote:


Does it make it a Sacred Geometry level feat?

You mean is it an easily broken feat that takes a supposedly situational trick and allows it to be used practically at will with very little investment, resulting in a ridiculous power increase for anyone who takes it? Yes.

Quote:


Heck no! Why? Because to be able to use it effectively, it requires you to work as a team with your group!

It let's you take advantage of things your allies are going to do anyways. It's not some magical team-building exercise, it's a way to take advantage of common tactics and ramp their effectiveness through the roof. Or ceiling, as it were.

Quote:
Sacred Geometry is an insane feat that just gives insane power to metamagic. Golden Lion Style rewards tactical play, but it order to us at these high tiers, requires party-wide investment.

Yes, Sacred Geometry is an insane feat. At least it isn't an auto-success until 14th level, about 9 levels after Golden Lion Style starts causing issues.

Quote:
Golden Lion Style is FINE. Powerful, but not overly so.

I disagree, and I've done both the math and the table-testing.

Quote:


I mean seriously, if it was such a problem. Why on earth has people only now started complaining about it? When we are so soon to the end of the playest, and its been around for several months already?

Because it's hard to catch everything. The Primal Fury discipline went to print, and now the design team has acknowledged that it's horrifically overpowered and they're running an extensive errata on it. Primal Fury was playtested for well over a year and still slipped through, and that's an entire discipline, not just one feat.


... If you're going to just ignore everything I say, then this conversastion isn't worth having. But I will say it again.

Golden Lion Style is NOWHERE NEAR the same power as Sacred Geometry. Golden Lion Style is a STRONG feat on the level of Percise Shot and Power Attack, and rewards teamwork like no other feat does. But it is NOWHERE NEAR BROKEN. There is NO NEED to toss a BRILLIANTLY designed feat back to the drawing board, simply because you can't stop b@$*!ing about how supposed'y powerful it is, and whenever someone reaons against it, you cover your ears and go 'lalalala, the feat is overpowered I don't care what you say lalalal'


6 people marked this as a favorite.

You know, you guys are mostly arguing back and forth right now without any actual proof. Instead, maybe we could give some math instead, and give a few scenarios to verify how powerful the feat really is. I'll start off with both examples at level 12, using the level 12 AM barbarian (DPR 161) as a comparison point.

We'll assume a party containing an initiator and a full caster, or at least someone capable of casting Summon Monster without much investment to summon multiple celestial eagles. We'll make the initiator a Zweihander sentinel, quite a bit under-optimized, with to-hit values and damage on AoOs as follows:

Hit: +12 BAB, +6 STR, +3 Weapon, +2 Flanking, -4 Power Attack = +19 Hit
Damage: 7 (Greatsword) + 7 (Punishing Defenses) + 12 (PA) + 9 (Str) + 3 (Weapon) = 38 Avg Damage
6 Attacks of Opportunity per round
Critical Threatens at 19-20, Adds 31 Damage

We assume no bonuses to hit or damage from boosts, stances, or anything else for the sake of simplicity, and no additional buffs other than weapon enhancement level. Against AC 27, this gives the warder a crappy hit rate of 65% on attacks of opportunity against targets of equal CR, since we didn't optimize him at all.

The wizard's familiar or something casts summon monster II from a wand, summoning two eagles. The eagles do their full attack sequence and miss with all of them, allowing the Zweihander Sentinel 6 AoOs against that target. Each hit adds the following DPR:

65% * 38 + (10% * 65% * 31) = 26.7 DPR

Multiply this by 6, and you end up with an additional 160.25 DPR for the 6 AoO sequence. This is in addition to what the warder can do on his turn, which means that a single casting of summon monster and one feat adds about as much DPS than an entire AM Barbarian at equal levels. And this is with a warder with no full-round boosts, no bonuses from stances, no buffs, and a terrible to-hit rate.

Optimize the warder just a bit more and this DPR goes up significantly. For instance, if we optimized for this trick and added Night's Knife (Boost), Discipline Focus, and Enlarge, while adding another +2 STR and +1 Weapon Enhancement, this increases to 281.45 DPR at level 12, which is almost the same as adding 1.75 AM Barbarians to the party. This is in addition to what the warder can normally do on his turn.

*

Let's now do the calculations for a less calculated scenario. Assume that we have a dual-wielding rogue TWF Warlord in the party alongside the aforementioned Zweihander Sentinel. We're going to optimize the warlord so that he has a really darned good hit rate (instead of lots of weapon enhancement), so:

TWF Warlord Hit Rates:

+12(BAB) + 7(DEX) + 3(Weapon) + 6(Flank) + 2(BattleProwess) = 30
Attack Bonuses +30/+30/+25/+25/+20/+20

This gives a miss chance of 5%/5%/5%/5%/30%/30% against a CR-equivalent enemy at AC 27. We don't actually need to calculate his damage or DPR - we only need to worry about what the Warder adds to this DPR with the Golden Lion Style feat. Since Tactical Flanker benefits the Warder as well, the amount of DPR added per AoO is:

95% * 38 + (10% * 95% * 31) = 39 DPR

Then, the Warder adds the following DPR to the warlord:

5% * 39 * 4 + 30% * 39 * 2 = 31 DPR

This is the DPR added by a single feat, above and beyond what the warder can normally do and without any real coordination of builds between the players. The warlord's flanking bonus helped us in this case, but without it the warlord himself will miss more often, which means that the DPR that we end up adding will remain around 20-30.

Add in another secondary melee, like a Oracle or Inquisitor, and this number easily jumps up to around 40-60. Of course, our Warder himself is still pretty unoptimized, so this goes up drastically when you add in boosts, buffs, and such.

For comparison, Power Attack only adds ~13-20 DPR at level 12 for a normal THF melee class (calculating in the increased miss chances).


... And what exactly is the point of that maths? Show how that if Golden Lion Style is focused by the entire party, its a powerful feat? Is that meant to be a completely and utterly shocking revelation that is meant to pernmanetly change my mind and instantly agree that Golden Lion Style is broken and should be banned forever?

Because it doesn't. At all.

In fact, all it does is actually makes my arguements stronger. The key method of abusing Golden Lion Style, is to invest resources into summoning monsters for the sole purpose of missing all their attacks and making the AoO bot waste all their AoO's on attack a single enemy. You keep repeating over and over and over again that 'This is the DPR added by a single feat', but its clear as day that the DPR added requires much more than you to just staple on the feat onto your build. If its changed so that summoned monsters can't be used, then Golden Lion Style shall be 100% fixed.

You see, the main problem with both of the examples, is that you missed out a critical component of the calculations. That is, how much DPR is lost by this purposeful missing? How much DPR would be gained if instead of someone wasting their turn summoning a flock eagles for the single purpose of attack a creature to proc AoO's, the full caster instead deal damage themself with a spell? How much could be gained, if instead of trying to do damage, they actually use the more effective method of stopping the enemy, battlefield control? How much DPR would be gained if the TWFing Warlord actually used their strikes and boosts, instead of just full-attacking all the time?

I'm not denying that Golden Lion Style is a strong feat. I'm not denying that Golden Lion Style has the potential for abuse. But calling it overpowered/broken? For such a brilliantly designed feat? I'm sorry, but no. Everyone's so focused on the potential abuse of it, that their forgetting that investment required to actually get all this 'extra DPR added by a single feat'. Like wasting time summoning a bunch of monsters that are just going to get killed in a single turn when the full caster can actually be doing what a full caster is meant to do a control the battlefield.

The maths shows one thing clearly.

Alone. Golden Lion Style does NOTHING. Hence why it is such a beautiful and well-designed feat that just requires a bit of touching up on to prevent abuse from summon monsters.


Great post, Felyndiira. :)

It's especially noticeable that in the summoning example the wizard could also simply burn a level 2 spell slot (which are dime a dozen at that level) and that while very fragile, the summoned eagles do need to be killed in order to avoid yet more AoOs for the warder in the next round. In that way a single casting of SM II is both adding a great deal of DPR and soaking up multiple attacks.


Yes yes, Summon Monster abuses Golden Lion Style, hence why its needs its a limitation. You know what through? If people are so afraid about it, why don't we limit the amount of times you can use per round? Say, 1+IL/5. That way at level 10 you can only use it 3 times a turn, which is half of the exmaple above at level 12. I still think that people are tunnel visioning on the fringe/abuse cases of Golden Lion Style and completely overlooking the amount of cost and investement required to use it effectively, but at least its easy to fix by putting a cap on the amount of AoO's you can get from it. AoO's which go up over time so it scales, but still means that there is no potential for abuse like people are screaming about.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Tempest, I'm gonna ask you to calm down. I appreciate your enthusiasm, but there is no need, whatsoever, to insult or belittle your fellow playtesters. We're all friends here and to be quite frank my stress levels are wholly maximized. Please don't add to it.

For everyone, this is your reminder that we are indeed paying attention. Everyone's lives got busy at the same time, which is why we've been quiet, but we are still reading and discussing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fury of the Tempest wrote:
... And what exactly is the point of that maths? Show how that if Golden Lion Style is focused by the entire party, its a powerful feat?

Read my second example again. It only assumes that you have another melee Warlord in the party with no additional tricks, no coordinated builds, no purposeful missing or any other building specifically to take advantage of the feat.

It then calculates the DPR that you gain solely by covering the rare instances that the build misses on its iterative attacks. The warlord isn't missing on purpose just to fuel the feat. He's attacking as usual, and the DPR added considers only the amount of DPR that the feat adds from the Warder covering the times the Warlord does miss. From a completely unoptimized warder.

THAT DPR comes out to two times what power attack gives you.

There's no teamwork build or anything in this case. It just assumes that you have a party in the first place. You can repeat this calculation with a bunch of other classes. Try it out with a barbarian in place of a warlord - you'll end up get pretty similar, drastic DPR boosts on a per-ally basis.

*

By the way, the AM Barbarian is a heavily optimized damage build. Being able to do 1.75x his damage is easily worth more than a single standard action spent on a Summon Monster SLA or Sacred Summons, and even more so for a familiar's actions whild UMDing a wand.

Heck, limiting the style to 1/round is STILL equal or more DPR than power attack when used normally with melee that are fond of iterative attacks.

Dark Archive

Quote:

Golden Lion Style [Combat, Style]

You are adept at taking advantage of your allies missed opportunities
Prerequisites: 1 or more Golden Lion stances, Diplomacy 3 ranks
Benefit: Whenever an ally who is flanking the same enemy as you misses an attack against that opponent, you can make an attack of opportunity against that opponent. Making an attack of opportunity in this manner does not qualify for the Paired Opportunists teamwork feat.
Special: This feat may be selected if a character is granted a bonus teamwork feat.

Is this better? What about making the AoOs from Golden Lion style cost 2 AoOs instead of 1? There is surely a way to make this a feat that is worth taking, without it being ridiculously useless or causing people to froth at the mouth in rage.

Can we stop this silly argument already? Please? Y'all giving me agita.


Maybe we can go Old Yeller on it? Feats to give new AoO triggers don't need to exist.

Also neither of the nicely mathed examples posted above used Paired Opportunist.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've read this s+$!storm discussion and have to agree Golden Lion Style should be limited in some way, probably once per round per ally.


Nyaa wrote:
I've read this s%&#storm discussion and have to agree Golden Lion Style should be limited in some way, probably once per round per ally.

I am in agreement with this, just suggested this to Elric as a possible fix a moment ago.

-X

Community Manager

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Removed some posts and their responses. Please dial back your responses—it's easy to get passionate and worked up about this, but there is not a need to be aggressive towards other posters.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My apologies for my participation in that argument. I agree that 1/round per ally is a good fix for the feat, and makes it still powerful while not overwhelming so.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In the interest of moving on from the subject of Golden Lion Style, and reaching a compromise between fans of the feat and its detractors, we've decided to limit it to a 1/round activation rate.


NO. NO. NO. NO.

1/round activation DESTROYS the feat completely! It turns it into a feat that it never worth taking! You said it yourself, Style Feats are meant to open up new styles of play, but what on earth does 1 AoO a round when an ally hit does?

Limit it to 1/round per ally, limit it 1+IL/5 per round our something. But please, PLEASE. Do not butcher this amazing feat and limit it to 1/round activation!

Even Felyndiira agreed that 1/round per ally is a good fix for crying out loud! Putting it at 1/round full stop is too strong a limit and completely butchers the feat!


1/round is fine. Considering you're almost guaranteed an AoO per round while using it.

I still don't like it since it's essentially a feat to give someone an extra attack on their full attack, but it's better than nothing.


Seranov wrote:
Quote:

Golden Lion Style [Combat, Style]

You are adept at taking advantage of your allies missed opportunities
Prerequisites: 1 or more Golden Lion stances, Diplomacy 3 ranks
Benefit: Whenever an ally who is flanking the same enemy as you misses an attack against that opponent, you can make an attack of opportunity against that opponent. Making an attack of opportunity in this manner does not qualify for the Paired Opportunists teamwork feat.
Special: This feat may be selected if a character is granted a bonus teamwork feat.

Is this better? What about making the AoOs from Golden Lion style cost 2 AoOs instead of 1? There is surely a way to make this a feat that is worth taking, without it being ridiculously useless or causing people to froth at the mouth in rage.

Can we stop this silly argument already? Please? Y'all giving me agita.

Sorry to come in completely from the cold, but why the Diplomacy prereq.? I mean both in terms of flavor and mechanics.

You need to be able to bond with your allies diplomatically/politically/socially? It is an honorable style practised by the genteel?

Or is it an artificial level prereq.?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Oceanshieldwolf wrote:

Sorry to come in completely from the cold, but why the Diplomacy prereq.? I mean both in terms of flavor and mechanics.

You need to be able to bond with your allies diplomatically/politically/socially? It is an honorable style practised by the genteel?

Or is it an artificial level prereq.?

Diplomacy is the discipline skill of Golden Lion, so it is listed as a prereq in place of a level/BAB bonus.

All of the other discipline style feats follow the same tradition of requiring X ranks of their respective discipline skills.


Ok gotcha. Thanks Felyndiira. It's the discipline's skill for flavor, and an artificial level prereq. Adds some nice flavor to the disciplines.


1/round is not fine. Its not a guaranteed AoO per round, and it is most definently NOT an 'extra attack on top of a full-attack', as your ally still has to miss! IF its 1/round, the most likely guy to proc is it another melee user, and they'll likely be almost as accurate as you!


I think it'd be a good idea to let GL Style lie for a bit. We've got plenty of other stuff that needs eyes on it before we ship it off to layout.

There are dozens of other feats in the document, and the Martial Traditions have mechanical effects associated with them that could use eyes too. I also recall not seeing much on Sleeping Goddess from this or other threads.


I've already posted my thoughts on the all of the feats... nothing more for me to say... Martial Traditions... well the Scarlet Throne one gives to a flat +2 to will saves... kinda powerful compared to the rest in all honestly... its probably worth as much as a feat, which makes it a bit much.


Can I ask if it's intentional that Piercing Thunder Style, as written, allows you to make AoOs against movement modes like teleportation, which normally does not provoke? I'm not really against it, but I just want a bit of clarification.

Also, as written and depending on how you interpret the "specific trumps general" rule of Pathfinder, this feat may trump all of the maneuvers and stances that (more generally) allow you to move without provoking. I suggest adding the following line to the feat text for clarity:

"If an effect (such as a maneuver [or teleportation]) prevents the target from provoking attacks of opportunity from movement, then they also do not provoke attacks of opportunity from this style."


Felyndiira wrote:

Can I ask if it's intentional that Piercing Thunder Style, as written, allows you to make AoOs against movement modes like teleportation, which normally does not provoke? I'm not really against it, but I just want a bit of clarification.

Also, as written and depending on how you interpret the "specific trumps general" rule of Pathfinder, this feat may trump all of the maneuvers and stances that (more generally) allow you to move without provoking. I suggest adding the following line to the feat text for clarity:

"If an effect (such as a maneuver [or teleportation]) prevents the target from provoking attacks of opportunity from movement, then they also do not provoke attacks of opportunity from this style."

You can ask that if I can ask you to explain what makes you think that's the case. It's very much not intended to do that.


My apologies for the phrasing. It was not my intention to be sarcastic, hostile, or anything to that effect.

It just seems that Piercing Thunder Style, as written, causes a lot of unintentional things to provoke by the "specific trumps general" rule. 5 foot steps not provoking, for instance, is a general Pathfinder rule, and since the feat (a more specific rule) causes you to provoke for "moving into your threatened area" without any written exceptions, it trumps the more general rule and causes 5ft steps to provoke.

It's not really that big of a deal overall. I just felt that it would be clearer to add a clause specifically saying that anything that didn't provoke when you move out of a threatened square also doesn't provoke with this feat.


I didn't think you were being sarcastic, I'm genuinely curious. I want the feat to work a certain way, and if it is breaking things like 5 ft. steps, teleportation or other maneuvers from blocking AoOs then it needs to be fixed.

901 to 950 of 1,152 << first < prev | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Third-Party Pathfinder RPG Products / Product Discussion / Dreamscarred Press Announces: Path of War Expanded! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.