Pummeling Style - Charge


Pathfinder Society

301 to 350 of 404 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
4/5

Lormyr wrote:
I personally don't see anything wrong with grandfathering the archetype. I also didn't have a problem with the aasimar / tiefling grandfathering. I think of it was a less severe correction than an outright ban with rebuild.

I didn't have a problem with grandfathering. It was more the mad scramble for people to make 'reserve' characters, the resentment of others for that, and the ensuing back and forth.

Even if campaign management were to implement a blanket ban effective immediately, you'd still have people asking "what about current characters under level 2?" "what about GM blobs?" etc.

3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hate banning something old and established to allow a new feat to be used.

To me it worse bannign something many people have and upsetting them than allowign this new feat.

There are already tons of style feats for monks to use and if this one is so great monks need it to be viable or whatever then the porblem is with the monk class. Not the feat.

This is an awesome feat, but letting something new while invaldating characters that people already have and love so new character can be mad is just inconsiderate. And I think rude.

New things ar emeant o open up more options not shut old ones down.

Liberty's Edge 2/5

I would say the best option would be to add a caveat to the feats requiring the BAB/Monk level be met, similar to the decision on the Evangelist preventing early access via spell like abilities. This way the abilities are available, no archetype is banned, and the intended power progress level is being upheld.

5/5 5/55/55/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm still at a loss as to why this, moms, or the moms sacred fist combo need to be banned. What character are people afraid of ?

Scarab Sages

Fomsie wrote:
I would say the best option would be to add a caveat to the feats requiring the BAB/Monk level be met, similar to the decision on the Evangelist preventing early access via spell like abilities. This way the abilities are available, no archetype is banned, and the intended power progress level is being upheld.

This would work, but I'm sure the net effect would be the same. You wouldn't see any MoMS monks anymore.

Also, several style chain feats are gated by skill ranks, not BAB, and MoMS would still bypass that in this scenario. Snake Fang for example.

Scarab Sages

BigNorseWolf wrote:
I'm still at a loss as to why this, moms, or the moms sacred fist combo need to be banned. What character are people afraid of ?

The crane wing nerf. Style Feat capstones are balanced around the fact that you normally can't get them until level 7-13. When you can get them at level 1-2, then you have a imbalance problem, especially in PFS where low level is the most common and the character retires for most purposes at 12.

Scarab Sages 1/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
I'm still at a loss as to why this, moms, or the moms sacred fist combo need to be banned. What character are people afraid of ?

Bypassing level requirement via MoMS has already negatively impacted two style feats that would have otherwise been fine: Crane Wing and Pummeling Charge.

I'm just waiting for someone to start pulling Kirin Strike nonsense with a MoMS 2/Investigator X build.

Silver Crusade 2/5

I don't think Crane Wing was ever balanced, myself.

Lantern Lodge 3/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I'm still at a loss as to why this, moms, or the moms sacred fist combo need to be banned. What character are people afraid of ?

I personally agree. I believe the discussion has led to a point in which some are speaking on the "what if" scenario of if our option comes down to ban MoMS or allow style feats as is, which do we prefer?

The bottom line as I see it is this: encounters are meant to be fought, and hoped to be successfully overcome. If the PCs overcome that encounter in a fraction of a round, or after several rounds of grueling struggle, the end result of victory is still the same. If it is going to come down to a quick shutdown, speaking personally, it doesn't matter to me one iota if it ends to a bad slumber hex save, hail of double-barrel gunslinger bullets, pouncing barbarian, pummeling monk, dazing fireball, or any of the other host of rocket tag powers available to PCs, because the result is the same, and a great many PCs have access to rocket tag if they so choose.

The conversation of doing these things with others at the table who prefer a different approach, and how that all interacts in terms of table etiquette is a separate conversation.

All that aside, I still believe that pummeling charge enhances the class capability of the monk significantly, and does not overall effect martial class balance in a considerably negative manner.

Scarab Sages 1/5

At higher level, more opponents will have multiple attacks.

Grand Lodge 2/5

Imbicatus wrote:

I've been a long time supporter of banning MoMS. The archetype is a trap if you single class it and horribly broken if you abuse the two level dip into it. It needs to go away, and anyone playing one now should have a full rebuild. Grandfathering will not work, as shown by the Aasimar/Tiefling situation.

It would be disruptive, but the long term gains to the campaign would outweigh the negatives.

What about grandfathering tieflings/aasimars doesn't work?

Scarab Sages

Artanthos wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
I'm still at a loss as to why this, moms, or the moms sacred fist combo need to be banned. What character are people afraid of ?

Bypassing level requirement via MoMS has already negatively impacted two style feats that would have otherwise been fine: Crane Wing and Pummeling Charge.

I'm just waiting for someone to start pulling Kirin Strike nonsense with a MoMS 2/Investigator X build.

Kirin Strike is a non-issue because of the horrible waste of swift actions to pull it off. You can only apply the damage on one attack in the 3rd round of combat, and most PFS fights I've been in don't last that long.

Silver Crusade 2/5

Artanthos wrote:
At higher level, more opponents will have multiple attacks.

So? It doesn't mean a "Get out jail free card" was ever balanced. I think that changing this feat could have been easily justified without MoMS.

Scarab Sages

claudekennilol wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:

I've been a long time supporter of banning MoMS. The archetype is a trap if you single class it and horribly broken if you abuse the two level dip into it. It needs to go away, and anyone playing one now should have a full rebuild. Grandfathering will not work, as shown by the Aasimar/Tiefling situation.

It would be disruptive, but the long term gains to the campaign would outweigh the negatives.

What about grandfathering tieflings/aasimars doesn't work?

People have been abusing the hell out of in my area. I've seen more Aasimars and Tieflings after than ban than before it.

4/5

Artanthos wrote:
I'm just waiting for someone to start pulling Kirin Strike nonsense with a MoMS 2/Investigator X build.

I already have. Turns out it's really not a big deal and I'll be training out of Monk as soon as I have the Prestige.

And that was including triple dipping with Focused Shot.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Just as an exercise in game design, here is my fix for MoMS:

Bonus Feat: At 1st level, 2nd level, and every four levels thereafter, a master of many styles may select a bonus style feat or the Elemental Fist feat. He does not have to meet the prerequisites of that feat, except the Elemental Fist feat. This bonus style feat must be from a style the master of many styles does not already have a style feat for. At 6th level and beyond, this bonus style feat may be selected from any style tree, even ones the master of many styles already has feats in. Alternatively, a master of many styles may choose a feat in that style's feat path (such as Earth Child Topple) as one of these bonus feats if he already has the appropriate style feat (such as Earth Child Style). The master of many styles does not need to meet any other prerequisite of the feat in the style's feat path.

This ability replaces a monk's standard bonus feats.

Bold are my additions


Finlanderboy wrote:

I hate banning something old and established to allow a new feat to be used.

To me it worse bannign something many people have and upsetting them than allowign this new feat.

There are already tons of style feats for monks to use and if this one is so great monks need it to be viable or whatever then the porblem is with the monk class. Not the feat.

This is an awesome feat, but letting something new while invaldating characters that people already have and love so new character can be mad is just inconsiderate. And I think rude.

New things ar emeant o open up more options not shut old ones down.

What about the change forced on Crane wing? It came in the same book as MoMS. Why did it get change and not the real problem, MoMS?

Scarab Sages

Your bolded text does nothing, trollbill. Style Feats are ONLY the entry feats of a style. The later feats in a style path are just combat feats that have the style feat as a prerequisite. Here is how I would change it:

Bonus Feat: At 1st level, 2nd level, and every four levels thereafter, a master of many styles may select a bonus style feat or the Elemental Fist feat. He does not have to meet the prerequisites of that feat, except the Elemental Fist feat. At 6th level and beyond, a master of many styles may choose a feat in a style's feat path (such as Earth Child Topple) as one of these bonus feats if he already has the appropriate style feat (such as Earth Child Style). The master of many styles does not need to meet any other prerequisite of the feat in the style's feat path.

This ability replaces a monk's standard bonus feats.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Imbicatus wrote:

Your bolded text does nothing, trollbill. Style Feats are ONLY the entry feats of a style. The later feats in a style path are just combat feats that have the style feat as a prerequisite. Here is how I would change it:

Bonus Feat: At 1st level, 2nd level, and every four levels thereafter, a master of many styles may select a bonus style feat or the Elemental Fist feat. He does not have to meet the prerequisites of that feat, except the Elemental Fist feat. At 6th level and beyond, a master of many styles may choose a feat in a style's feat path (such as Earth Child Topple) as one of these bonus feats if he already has the appropriate style feat (such as Earth Child Style). The master of many styles does not need to meet any other prerequisite of the feat in the style's feat path.

This ability replaces a monk's standard bonus feats.

D'oh. Good catch. Guess I need to exercise more.

Sovereign Court 2/5

Slacker2010 wrote:
What about the change forced on Crane wing? It came in the same book as MoMS. Why did it get change and not the real problem, MoMS?

I'm guessing it's because the loudest voices were complaining about how crane wing PCs are too hard to deal with, versus complaining about how it's too easy to get crane wing with MoMS (which increased the occurrence of crane wing PCs). To be fair, high AC PCs with Crane Wing were too difficult to hit, as in a lot of cases it would require 2 nat 20s. The decision to errata it wasn't bad, it was just the execution, I think.

4/5

Acedio wrote:
Slacker2010 wrote:
What about the change forced on Crane wing? It came in the same book as MoMS. Why did it get change and not the real problem, MoMS?
I'm guessing it's because the loudest voices were complaining about how crane wing PCs are too hard to deal with, versus complaining about how it's too easy to get crane wing with MoMS (which increased the occurrence of crane wing PCs). To be fair, high AC PCs with Crane Wing were too difficult to hit, as in a lot of cases it would require 2 nat 20s. The decision to errata it wasn't bad, it was just the execution, I think.

I posted a detailed analysis how bad the errata was in terms of % of being hit before and after the errata (assuming you deflected the first attack each time), and it was just a horribly bad nerf in terms of number of hits you take. Changing it to +4 AC vs the first attack, with the ability to declare after the attack would have been a much better nerf as it would have kept Crane Wing competitive without negating one attack monsters.

This analysis was ignored in the 500+ post thread. :(

I think we can all agree that Crane Wing needed a change as before my PCs with it walked around with virtual impunity, safe in the knowledge they would avoid a single hit every round of combat, and that is not good for the health of suspenseful play.

That said, getting Crane Wing w/o MoMS actually took quite an investment, so this puts the onus back on MoMS. Getting it without monk levels was even more of an investment.

3/5

Slacker2010 wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:

I hate banning something old and established to allow a new feat to be used.

To me it worse bannign something many people have and upsetting them than allowign this new feat.

There are already tons of style feats for monks to use and if this one is so great monks need it to be viable or whatever then the porblem is with the monk class. Not the feat.

This is an awesome feat, but letting something new while invaldating characters that people already have and love so new character can be mad is just inconsiderate. And I think rude.

New things ar emeant o open up more options not shut old ones down.

What about the change forced on Crane wing? It came in the same book as MoMS. Why did it get change and not the real problem, MoMS?

Thats was paizo rule makers deciding to chnage the feat and the entiro pathfinder ruleset.

I am debating not losing MoMS in PFS.

If they errata the rules, great!

I am against takign things people already have to give somehting else that is smaller.

Sovereign Court 2/5

Finlanderboy wrote:
I am against takign things people already have to give somehting else that is smaller.

Not that I have a horse in the race, but I think the argument is that banning MoMS, would correct a lot of balance issues with style feats, would justify Pummeling Strike to be allowed in PFS, and would reduce the risk of future style feats being banned in the future because of the early entry MoMS enables.

So maybe it's not so much that we get "something else that is smaller" but we get many more "smaller" options out of it?

4/5

Acedio wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:
I am against takign things people already have to give somehting else that is smaller.

Not that I have a horse in the race, but I think the argument is that banning MoMS, would correct a lot of balance issues with style feats, would justify Pummeling Strike to be allowed in PFS, and would reduce the risk of future style feats being banned in the future because of the early entry MoMS enables.

So maybe it's not so much that we get "something else that is smaller" but we get many more "smaller" options out of it?

It even has a precedent in additional resources both in the retraining rules and the evangalist PrC, in terms of disallowing early access to level 10+ content at level 2.

Scarab Sages

If they updated additional resources to state A Master of Many Styles cannot use bonus feats to select a feat that has a style feat as a prerequisite until level 6, I would be satisfied.

It gates high level feats out of 1-5 tiers, drops the dip potential of the class, (but not much; you still get two styles at once, two bonus style feats, three good saves, and evasion), and actually encourages a master of many styles to have many styles.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ** Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne

Imbicatus wrote:

If they updated additional resources to state A Master of Many Styles cannot use bonus feats to select a feat that has a style feat as a prerequisite until level 6, I would be satisfied.

It gates high level feats out of 1-5 tiers, drops the dip potential of the class, (but not much; you still get two styles at once, two bonus style feats, three good saves, and evasion), and actually encourages a master of many styles to have many styles.

Yes, that was the idea behind my admittedly poorly worded attempt to fix the class that you, in turn, fixed to actually mean what I intended.

Quote:
(but not much; you still get two styles at once, two bonus style feats, three good saves, and evasion)

This is a long standing issue with monks in general that preceded Pathfinder, so it is not a MoMS specific issue. I have seen some people who almost always take a 2 level dip into monk regardless of the build.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Missouri—Cape Girardeau

Andrew Christian wrote:
Mahtobedis wrote:

Given the nerf to pummeling charge I don't think it would be game breaking to include it in the game even with MoMS.

Pummeling Charge's damage output is limited by two pretty big factors.

The first is that it now requires the use of unarmed strikes, and even though you can make it so all your hits crit if one of them unarmed strikes are still only a times 2. Many builds that use 15-20 weapons crit effectivly every hit for times 2 as well.

The second way Pummeling Charge's damage is limited is in the number of attacks produced. Lets assume a worst case scenario and a person dips into MoMS or Unarmed Fighter to get the feat early. At best this means they can get two attacks on a charge as opposed to one. So at the low levels we are worried about they get an extra attack once a fight and only if they themselves are not charged. As the character progresses in level they will eventually pick up two more attacks (level 6 or 7), but then they are also at the point where NPC's will be better equipped to wheather the damage and do some punishment in return.

I created a Brawler (mutagentic mauler) / Bloodrager 2nd level character. When raging and mutagen enhanced I get two claw attacks for 1d6+7.

If I dipped MoMS at 3rd level and took Pummeling Charge, I could do 4d6 +28 damage on a crit.

Does that sound like the damage a 3rd level character should be doing?

And this isn't even super optimized. I am only starting at a 16 Strength. How gross would this be if I started with a 20 Strength? And had Power Attack? And then at 4th level dipped Cleric of Gozreh with the Growth Subdomain and upped the claws to 1d8 +14 or 4d8+56 on a Crit.

This can snowball pretty badly if you make choices simply for damage output instead of just making a character that's decent at what he does.

I find this interesting. Given that information (and knowing that you are rather prolific when it comes to mechanics discussions!), which do you think is better: banning the archetype or the Style feat (and subsequently, any other Style feats that might be designed similarly in the future) for PFS play?

I understand what John Compton is saying... if MoMS had been banned from early on, there might be less to worry about. By now, a large portion of the player base has probably bent the spirit of that archetype, by taking a dip into Monk just for this archetype. And yes, we should always consider how it impacts organized play to remove a mechanic already in play, especially after this long.

Personally, I think it would be easier to ban the archetype and allow a limited rebuild of those Monk levels affected than to keep removing feats and limiting the scope of the design team when considering Style feats. But then again, I'm still perplexed as to why the True Primitive archetype is still legal too.

1/5

We're not going to get it back at this point. If we were it would have happened after the errata. I'd love to get Brock in here to comment since it seems the overwhelming majority seem to be in favor of leaving both or at least pummeling charge legal.

Scarab Sages

Michael VonHasseln wrote:
Andrew Christian wrote:
Mahtobedis wrote:

Given the nerf to pummeling charge I don't think it would be game breaking to include it in the game even with MoMS.

Pummeling Charge's damage output is limited by two pretty big factors.

The first is that it now requires the use of unarmed strikes, and even though you can make it so all your hits crit if one of them unarmed strikes are still only a times 2. Many builds that use 15-20 weapons crit effectivly every hit for times 2 as well.

The second way Pummeling Charge's damage is limited is in the number of attacks produced. Lets assume a worst case scenario and a person dips into MoMS or Unarmed Fighter to get the feat early. At best this means they can get two attacks on a charge as opposed to one. So at the low levels we are worried about they get an extra attack once a fight and only if they themselves are not charged. As the character progresses in level they will eventually pick up two more attacks (level 6 or 7), but then they are also at the point where NPC's will be better equipped to wheather the damage and do some punishment in return.

I created a Brawler (mutagentic mauler) / Bloodrager 2nd level character. When raging and mutagen enhanced I get two claw attacks for 1d6+7.

If I dipped MoMS at 3rd level and took Pummeling Charge, I could do 4d6 +28 damage on a crit.

Does that sound like the damage a 3rd level character should be doing?

And this isn't even super optimized. I am only starting at a 16 Strength. How gross would this be if I started with a 20 Strength? And had Power Attack? And then at 4th level dipped Cleric of Gozreh with the Growth Subdomain and upped the claws to 1d8 +14 or 4d8+56 on a Crit.

This can snowball pretty badly if you make choices simply for damage output instead of just making a character that's decent at what he does.

I find this interesting. Given that information (and knowing that you are rather prolific when it comes to mechanics discussions!), which do you think is...

That character would be unable to take pummeling charge at 3 even with the MoMS dip. Brawlers don't get Brawler's Flurry until 2nd level, and you have to have Flurry or BAB 6 to take Pummeling Style with a non-bonus feat.

Shadow Lodge

BigNorseWolf wrote:
I think that the argument "this feat is not as good as using a 700 gp item from the core rule book thats been in the game for 15 years" is about as good as its possible to make in favor of the option NOT being over powered. High strength, two handed weapon and guy with bow are not overpowered options, they're the standard.

I'm not sure that comparing Unarmed Strikes to Composite Longbows is an entirely valid argument. While I agree 100% that your statement is correct, it is ultimately comparing melee with 1 very unique light weapon to ranged combat with another fairly unique ranged weapon. The two-handed weapon comparison is a bit closer, but I think the best comparison is to compare Pummeling Charge to another feat with similarly intensive prerequisites (specifically, another style feat, which can also be "abused" via MoMS), and with benefits to the same type of character. Or more specifically, I think it should be compared with a Style feat that helps an unarmed strike focused combatant in combat. So, I will submit this as my thoughts of why Pummeling Charge is not broken compared to other similar combat options.

Pummeling Charge v. Dragon Style:
Pummeling Charge is, in my opinion, equally balanced with Dragon Style. First, lets look at them separately.

Pummeling Charge:

  • Gives you a "full attack" at the end of a charge.
  • Restricts your "full attack" to one target.
  • Restricts you to making your "full attack" with unarmed strikes (which are a very weak weapon, being hard to enchant, having a poor critical hit profile, and not being inherently made of a special material).
  • Can be accessed by most single-classed characters at levels 12-13 or higher
  • Can be accessed by certain single-classed characters by level 8-9 or higher.
  • Can be accessed by anyone willing to multiclass, or 1 type of single-classed character by level 2.
Dragon Style:
  • Gives you the ability to charge, run, or withdraw at full speed through difficult terrain.
  • Gives you a bonus on saving throws versus a variety of conditions
  • Gives you slightly more damage on your first successful unarmed strike each round.
  • Can be accessed by any single-classed character by level 3 or higher.
  • Can be accessed by 2 types of single-classed characters, as well as anyone willing to multiclass, at level 1.

Now, lets look at this. Pummeling Charge only gives any benefits to a character who uses unarmed strikes, while Dragon Style gives a save bonus and the ability to charge/run/withdraw through difficult terrain to anyone, including a character using a 2-handed weapon or ranged weapon. The main combat bonus for each (the only benefit for Pummeling Charge, and the damage bonus for Dragon Style) only applies to one creature each round. You cannot use Pummeling Charge if you cannot charge, but you can still use Dragon Style in almost any situation (any situation with difficult terrain, with saving throws versus Paralysis, Sleep, or Stunning effects), or with a creature you can make an unarmed strike against).

In my opinion (its hard to say factually which is better), having both an offensive and defensive benefit, and one that can easily apply in every round of a fight, is roughly equal to having a single, focused offensive benefit that will most likely only occur once in a given fight (the round you can charge in).

Sovereign Court 2/5

We should not forget that there's also a large amount of PFS players who have not thrown in on this thread (for any number of reasons). Just because people in this thread think it's a good idea to unban the feat doesn't mean that the community as a whole does. Nor does it mean that behind the scenes a conversation about unbanning it already hasn't taken place.

Shadow Lodge 4/5

Undone wrote:
We're not going to get it back at this point.

Six pages later, and still with the melodrama. Did you ever think they have more on their plates than deciding this issue? The fact that they're even considering banning MoMS means the issue is bigger than one feat. They'll make a decision once they have weighed the effect it will have on the campaign.

As for grandfathering, they should name dates already passed. Then there will be no "mad rush" to do whatever is about to be banned, just a simple cut-off where you either had it or you didn't.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Global Organized Play Coordinator

8 people marked this as a favorite.

We will be discussing this in futher detail at this Wednesday's PFS meeting and hopefully have a resolution by week's end.


Michael Brock wrote:
We will be discussing this in futher detail at this Wednesday's PFS meeting and hopefully have a resolution by week's end.

Yall should record the results of yall wednesday meetings and put out a podcast once a month. That would be really cool. Assuming its not too much work.

4/5

Michael Brock wrote:
We will be discussing this in futher detail at this Wednesday's PFS meeting and hopefully have a resolution by week's end.

Please don't ban one of the most popular archetypes in the game. I am really hoping for Pummeling Charge to be reinstated, as it doesn't provide any further issues now that Pummeling Style has been clarified.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Game Master wrote:
Please don't ban one of the most popular archetypes in the game.

I understand this, but have you ever actually played a single class MoMS? I have. It's terrible. The styles alone do not make up for the lack of Flurry.

90% of the players who takes the archetype only take two levels in monk and are using the early access to style feats to augment weapon builds or unarmed brawler fighters with to Dragon Style, Snake Style, or Crane Style, although the crane wing nerf stopped most of the latter.

And if the biggest draw of the class is in the first two levels, then something is wrong.

3/5

Imbicatus wrote:
Game Master wrote:
Please don't ban one of the most popular archetypes in the game.

I understand this, but have you ever actually played a single class MoMS? I have. It's terrible. The styles alone do not make up for the lack of Flurry.

90% of the players who takes the archetype only take two levels in monk and are using the early access to style feats to augment weapon builds or unarmed brawler fighters with to Dragon Style, Snake Style, or Crane Style, although the crane wing nerf stopped most of the latter.

And if the biggest draw of the class is in the first two levels, then something is wrong.

Pairing dragon style, tiger, and an elemental style can have huge damage attacks.

I think it makes up for flurry.

Scarab Sages

Finlanderboy wrote:


Pairing dragon style, tiger, and an elemental style can have huge damage attacks.

I think it makes up for flurry.

That are limited to 3/4 BAB unarmed strikes with no real way to increase accuracy. Elemental Fist styles are limited in uses per day and if you miss you waste a charge. Not to mention the fact that if you want to take an Elemental Style, you need to take Elemental Fist with one of your bonus feats(or be stuck with a single element if you use dragon style), as the requirements on it are insane.

It looks good on paper, but in practice, not so much. You basically become a rogue offensively with a lower damage SA that is elemental and limited use per day.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Imbicatus wrote:
Game Master wrote:
Please don't ban one of the most popular archetypes in the game.

I understand this, but have you ever actually played a single class MoMS? I have. It's terrible. The styles alone do not make up for the lack of Flurry.

90% of the players who takes the archetype only take two levels in monk and are using the early access to style feats to augment weapon builds or unarmed brawler fighters with to Dragon Style, Snake Style, or Crane Style, although the crane wing nerf stopped most of the latter.

And if the biggest draw of the class is in the first two levels, then something is wrong.

Harumphs. Thats actually a pretty good argument for a moms ban.

4/5

I had a player make a straight nasty panther style themed MOMS in an AP. Considering he could dish out probably double the number of attacks a flurry monk can (when heaven aligned up to 4 on one target, while taking 2 on several secondary targets and quite possibly leaving them all prone) I'd have to disagree that it's damage or utility is terrible. It certainly takes a very very high degree of system mastery to make it work, but the monk requires a very high degree anyway, barring pummeling charge which just finally puts the class into the layman's territory.

BUT, you are correct on the other half, most people will use it as a 2 level dip to pick up some style feats. You can combine it with sohei to get always act in the surprise round over stunning fist, or Iron mountain to get toughness and +1 ac instead of evasion for armor users. I'm not particularly opposed to an archetype that's really for "dipping" as the game already has quite a few IMO(Gendermae Cavalier, Divine Hunter Paladin, Diabolist, Fighter Lore Warden, Living Monolith, to name the most popular), but I could see how someone may be turned off by it.

4/5 RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Imbicatus wrote:
Finlanderboy wrote:


Pairing dragon style, tiger, and an elemental style can have huge damage attacks.

I think it makes up for flurry.

That are limited to 3/4 BAB unarmed strikes with no real way to increase accuracy. Elemental Fist styles are limited in uses per day and if you miss you waste a charge. Not to mention the fact that if you want to take an Elemental Style, you need to take Elemental Fist with one of your bonus feats(or be stuck with a single element if you use dragon style), as the requirements on it are insane.

It looks good on paper, but in practice, not so much. You basically become a rogue offensively with a lower damage SA that is elemental and limited use per day.

I've taken this exact build (straight MoMS with dragon, tiger and elemental style) to many conventions in the area. It works in practice from my vantage point, and seems to be right about where other typical damage-dealing builds are at that level (he's level 8 now). Maybe not a totally optimized damage dealer, but I'm happy with where he's at.

Scarab Sages

Panther is probably the best option for a single class moms, granted. But it's bonus attacks are dependent on something actually making an AoO against you. It puts you in a lot of danger, and once you make a massive retaliatory strike, most intelligent foes will let you move away without making an AoO.

4/5

It all boils down to this:

Does MoMS make PFS less fun or balanced than it would be if it were removed?

Even if you feel that it does, consider the massive impact of all of the players whose perfectly legal, perfectly acceptable builds (which people seem to be villifying in this thread) will suddenly become illegal. They will need full rebuilds at a minimum for their characters to remain playable. Is it truly worth it to screw over so many players just because it "seems illogical" to dip two levels of monk to get some useful combat feats? Compare a single melee martial character, MoMS or no, to any caster who is half-awake at the table and while designing his build, or an archer who is not actively attempting to be ineffective. I don't think MoMS causes any negative consequences to gameplay, and it's an awesome way to get some useful feats on a character.


You dont have to ban the archetype, Imbicatus gave a good fix for it. Mention that the first two feats (level 1 and 2) have to be used on Style feats (the actual style), so there will be no dipping 2 levels to bypass reqs. If you want to dip 6 levels then you should get any feat you want.

4/5

I'd be amenable to that change, though it would still destroy a lot of currently-existing characters' builds.

Scarab Sages

Game Master wrote:
I'd be amenable to that change, though it would still destroy a lot of currently-existing characters' builds.

The only builds it would destroy are those that are abusing the two level dip. If you were a single class MoMS or high enough level to get the second style chain feat with a normal feat, then it does nothing to your build. If not, then does losing early access to that single feat really destroy your build? You can still take snake fang or tiger pounce at 9 without any monk levels. Dragon Ferocity at 5. Panther Parry has no BAB or skill rank locks.

Pummeling Charge is going to need Brawler, Monk, or Sacred Fist to use it in PFS, but the only unarmed builds that would really benefit from it are Fighters, Faithful Combat Irori Rangers or Slayers, and Irorian Paladins, and they would need a high dex and TWF. Without the extra attacks from flurry, pummeling style is far less impressive.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5 ***

Under A Bleeding Sun wrote:
most people will use it as a 2 level dip to pick up some style feats. You can combine it with sohei to get always act in the surprise round over stunning fist, or Iron mountain to get toughness and +1 ac instead of evasion for armor users.

Sohei and MoMS don't stack, they both modify a Monk's bonus feats (tho I'm unaware of the "mountain" archetype).

4/5

Imbicatus wrote:
abusing

There is no need for inflammatory language to describe it. There is nothing morally wrong or incorrect about effectively using multiclassing options to build a character. The players who choose to dip two levels of MoMS for a style feat and a later feat in the chain aren't cheating, and they aren't abusing anything.

Scarab Sages

Game Master wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
abusing
There is no need for inflammatory language to describe it. There is nothing morally wrong or incorrect about effectively using multiclassing options to build a character. The players who choose to dip two levels of MoMS for a style feat and a later feat in the chain aren't cheating, and they aren't abusing anything.

It's overpowered for it's level. It's not cheating, but I wouldn't bring it to a table. The same way wouldn't make a hunter with a one level dip of Sohei to pick up Mounted Skirmisher, or play a Rogue Horizon walker and sink every available feat into extra rogue talent: terrain mastery.

Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's not out of balance with the rest of the game.

Silver Crusade 2/5

It's the same phenomenon with the old 3.0 ranger.

301 to 350 of 404 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Pummeling Style - Charge All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.