Game Master |
Game Master wrote: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.Imbicatus wrote:abusingThere 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.
And I would.
And neither of us is wrong.
Imbicatus |
Imbicatus wrote:Game Master wrote: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.Imbicatus wrote:abusingThere 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.And I would.
And neither of us is wrong.
In the context of organized play, where there is the precedent of banning options that are otherwise legal for balance reasons, such as the stopping of early entry into the Evangelist PrC, the Cape of Feinting, Bracers of the Falcon, and the Master and Synthesist Summoner, I would say one of us was.
claudekennilol |
Game Master wrote:Imbicatus wrote:Game Master wrote: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.Imbicatus wrote:abusingThere 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.And I would.
And neither of us is wrong.
In the context of organized play, where there is the precedent of banning options that are otherwise legal for balance reasons, such as the stopping of early entry into the Evangelist PrC, the Cape of Feinting, Bracers of the Falcon, and the Master and Synthesist Summoner, I would say one of us was.
And you would be wrong to say that one of you is wrong. Now both of you stop with the measuring contest as you're derailing the already tenuous topic. Just because you have a different opinion doesn't mean everyone else is wrong.
Imbicatus |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not saying either of us are wrong in a home game. There is no badwrongfun. I'm just saying that in PFS, you make concessions for organized play. One of those concessions is to dial back the options that give power out of line with most options for that level. Many of these have been done by campaign leadership in either banning or limiting entry into options.
But you are right, and the has been a derail of the discussion at hand, so I apologize and bow out of the side argument.
Karu the Bold Strider |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If MoMS was banned then I would never have gotten the joy of playing The Bold Strider as he currently is and I love him more than I love Ace of the Flesh Puppets. (MoMS 3/ Pal 2 / Champion of Irori 6)
I would hate to think that the PFS board would listen to your complaints because you saw a shiny new toy and are exacerbated on why you can't use it. Under your logic, I wonder why we don't also ban Paladin dips for the equivalent of Divine Protection. Two levels and you get the equivalent of a banned feat!
Finlanderboy |
I'm not saying either of us are wrong in a home game. There is no badwrongfun. I'm just saying that in PFS, you make concessions for organized play. One of those concessions is to dial back the options that give power out of line with most options for that level. Many of these have been done by campaign leadership in either banning or limiting entry into options.
But you are right, and the has been a derail of the discussion at hand, so I apologize and bow out of the side argument.
I disagree completely. I think you are under no obligation to adjust the abilities of yoru character in organized play.
Now while you are playing if your character can solo everyfight. it might be more polite for the other at the table to dial back your actions at that point.
To me it seems silly to purposely tone down the power level of your character. I agree with and completely giving a character sub-optimized features for roleplay flavor. But just sub-optimizing them for the sake of sub-optimizing seems silly to me.
Imbicatus |
I honestly don't want it banned, I want it fixed. If moms didn't allow access to high level feats early, there never would have been the crane wing nerf.
As for comparing Paladin to Divine Protection, it's not the same. Paladin dips are fine, because you are limiting yourself to being LG and following the paladin code forever if you want to use Divine Grace, and you lose two caster levels on your Oradin or Cleric to do it. Divine protection has no alignment or code requirements, and allows you to keep your full caster level.
Karu the Bold Strider |
Divine Grace = Two Level Dip in Paladin; Restrictions = LG (not sure how much of a restriction that is in PFS when half the stuff you do is evil or chaotic in the name of the Society and GMs have to handwave that away) and you lose two levels to your class.
Pummelling Charge = Two Level Dip in Monk; Restrictions = Lawful, you lose two levels to your class, you don't get Flurry and you don't get full BAB.
Looks pretty similar to me. Actually, MoMS looks worse for martials due to the whole losing a point of BAB.
Banning/Fixing MoMS is just a kneejerk reaction to seeing something you feel that you are deserved and trying to make concessions in order to make Paizo give it to you. For all of the bluster that Monks and Martials are broken, they are still played and people still love their characters.
Also, you cannot say with any certainty that Crane Wing was nerfed because of MoMS. You know, unless you are on the PDT.
9mm |
again, it shouldn't have been banned to begin with.
And no MOMS is not breaking the game either.
Let martials have nice things.
I could do 4d6 +28 damage on a crit.
and a Two-handed fighter with a large greatsword would be doing even more at level 3. and as pointed out, your build doesn't work. Again, even with early entry dip, the most pummeling charge could do is 4d6+4xstr on crit without magical assistance, at which point it matches the THF's base stats.
Slacker2010 |
Im not of the mind that characters should have Pummeling charge at level 2. If there was an archetype for some class (other than barbarian) that gave access to Greater Beast Totem with a 1 or two level dip, then every barbarian would pick up the two levels and have pounce at level 2.
There is a reason some feats have requirements. Im ok with early access but there is a pattern to most of the early access. Look at Rangers bonus feats at level 6. For several styles they get a feat normally it would take a character to get to level 11ish to pick up. Same with Zen Archers and Improved Precise Shot. Even the regular monk bonus feats tier up. I think it was an oversight in the design of the MoMS that the designer didnt take the time to tier up the selection. They should not be able to skip to feats ment for level 11ish characters at level 1 or 2. I think pushing it to 6 as Imbicatus suggested would be a good thing.
That said, even without it. Its not the end of the world. It just hamstrings PFS any time any really good Style Feat comes out. Feats have requirements for game balance. By passing that upsets the balance, and I predict that we will see more Style feats banned/no allowed from future books due to MoMS.
Undone |
I don't believe either of those needed to be banned.
Although I do compliment them on banning evolved summoned monster. That feat deserved a ban really really bad.
However if one is to be banned let's ban what will add 2-5 more things to the list, not the one issue. In the future there will be more.
Chris Lambertz Paizo Glitterati Robot |
9mm |
Removed some posts. Baiting posts for a "martial vs caster" debate are ultimately not going to end up being productive for this thread, I don't think.
you know it's really hard to have a discussion if the moment you don't like where it's headed you nuke it form orbit.
casters weren't even brought up.
Chris Lambertz Paizo Glitterati Robot |
redward |
Can someone show me a build with this combo that ruins the game? Without that, I can't see a reason to ban it. If it makes the monks good at mobile fighting with their fists...then its only making monks do what monks should have done all along.
'Ruins the game' is of course relative. With a quick, back-of-the-envelope calculation I have a L4 MoMSacred Fist doing double the DPR of a L4 2H Fighter and about 75% more than a L4 Barbarian (both using Greatswords). I haven't sketched that out to later levels, and I likely won't since they just legalized Pummeling Charge making this all moot.
Renegade Paladin |
BigNorseWolf wrote:'Ruins the game' is of course relative. With a quick, back-of-the-envelope calculation I have a L4 MoMSacred Fist doing double the DPR of a L4 2H Fighter and about 75% more than a L4 Barbarian (both using Greatswords). I haven't sketched that out to later levels, and I likely won't since they just legalized Pummeling Charge making this all moot.Can someone show me a build with this combo that ruins the game? Without that, I can't see a reason to ban it. If it makes the monks good at mobile fighting with their fists...then its only making monks do what monks should have done all along.
... No they didn't. I just went and looked at Additional Resources, and it's still on the ban list.
Michael Brock Global Organized Play Coordinator |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
redward wrote:... No they didn't. I just went and looked at Additional Resources, and it's still on the ban list.BigNorseWolf wrote:'Ruins the game' is of course relative. With a quick, back-of-the-envelope calculation I have a L4 MoMSacred Fist doing double the DPR of a L4 2H Fighter and about 75% more than a L4 Barbarian (both using Greatswords). I haven't sketched that out to later levels, and I likely won't since they just legalized Pummeling Charge making this all moot.Can someone show me a build with this combo that ruins the game? Without that, I can't see a reason to ban it. If it makes the monks good at mobile fighting with their fists...then its only making monks do what monks should have done all along.
It will come off on the next Additional Resources update.
Morgoon |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can someone show me a build with this combo that ruins the game? Without that, I can't see a reason to ban it. If it makes the monks good at mobile fighting with their fists...then its only making monks do what monks should have done all along.
I've read through this entire thread and it's driving me crazy that no one actually shared a powerful build abusing this.
Undone |
BigNorseWolf wrote:I've read through this entire thread and it's driving me crazy that no one actually shared a powerful build abusing this.Can someone show me a build with this combo that ruins the game? Without that, I can't see a reason to ban it. If it makes the monks good at mobile fighting with their fists...then its only making monks do what monks should have done all along.
While a slight necro I think this is the build people were worried about.
Warpriest of Desna
Sacred Fist archetype
STR 18
DEX 12
CON 12
INT 10
WIS 18
CHA 5
Traits: Fate's favored, Magical Knack
Blessings: Luck, Good
Warpriest Sacred Fist 1: Pummeling Style, Improved unarmed strike
Master of Many styles 1: Pummeling Charge
Warpriest Sacred Fist 2: Power attack
Warpriest Sacred Fist 3:
Warpriest Sacred Fist 4: Improved init
Warpriest Sacred Fist 5:
Warpriest Sacred Fist 6: Dragon Style, Dragon Ferocity
Warpriest Sacred Fist 7:
Warpriest Sacred Fist 8: Combat style master
Warpriest Sacred Fist 9:
Warpriest Sacred Fist 10: Quicken Blessing
OR
Warpriest Sacred Fist 1: Pummeling Style, Improved unarmed strike
Master of Many styles 1: Pummeling Charge
Master of Many styles 2: Dragon Style, Dragon Ferocity
Warpriest Sacred Fist 2:
Warpriest Sacred Fist 3: Power attack
Warpriest Sacred Fist 4:
Warpriest Sacred Fist 5: Improved Initative
Warpriest Sacred Fist 6: <FILLER STYLE>
Warpriest Sacred Fist 7: Combat Style master
Warpriest Sacred Fist 8:
Warpriest Sacred Fist 9: Horn of the Criosphinx
There's really no way to abuse it any more than the sacred fist. It's also where several major questions came from.
The thing is pummeling charge just adds damage. More damage really almost should never break the game when it can only be applied to 1 target a turn.
Ascalaphus Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
BigNorseWolf wrote:I've read through this entire thread and it's driving me crazy that no one actually shared a powerful build abusing this.Can someone show me a build with this combo that ruins the game? Without that, I can't see a reason to ban it. If it makes the monks good at mobile fighting with their fists...then its only making monks do what monks should have done all along.
Which might be part of the reason that Pummeling Charge has been un-banned. After the clarification in the Style that it only works with Unarmed Strike, it became clear its power level was acceptable.
But consider what might happen otherwise: people start rolling up PCs with Pummeling Style, early entry Charge and greatswords, and then the Style is clarified to only work with Unarmed Strikes.
So preventing people from taking Charge until Style was clarified was a prudent move.
9mm |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Morgoon wrote:BigNorseWolf wrote:I've read through this entire thread and it's driving me crazy that no one actually shared a powerful build abusing this.Can someone show me a build with this combo that ruins the game? Without that, I can't see a reason to ban it. If it makes the monks good at mobile fighting with their fists...then its only making monks do what monks should have done all along.
While a slight necro I think this is the build people were worried about.
** spoiler omitted **
There's really no way to abuse it any more than the sacred fist. It's also where several major questions came from.
The thing is pummeling charge just adds damage. More damage really almost should never break the game when it can only be applied to 1 target a turn.
Considering neither build has any way of combining the two styles, it's dpr isn't greater than a standard Sacred fist. Even with a full 3 levels in MoMs, it just means a 1-2 more rounds of full-attacking provided you can charge. If this is the best they can come up with, then there wasn't anything to be afraid of to begin with.
DrSwordopolis |
Considering neither build has any way of combining the two styles, it's dpr isn't greater than a standard Sacred fist. Even with a full 3 levels in MoMs, it just means a 1-2 more rounds of full-attacking provided you can charge. If this is the best they can come up with, then there wasn't anything to be afraid of to begin with.
I dunno about the previously posted build, but it's more about the hasted level 10 BarBar/Fighter wielding a falchion with a 17-20 crit range having a ~50/50 chance each charge to crit on all three attacks for x3 damage while using double their strength to damage from Horn of the Criosphinx.
Probability goes to 60% crit chance at level 11.
Likewise, you can build a terrifying critical focused two weapon fighter using high crit range weapons; a level 11 hasted two weapon fighter has about an 80% chance of critting on all seven attacks.
With the style being clarified to working with IUS only, I'm happy with the power level - it finally lets unarmed monks be (useful) mobile combatants.
9mm |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I dunno about the previously posted build, but it's more about the hasted level 10 BarBar/Fighter wielding a falchion with a 17-20 crit range having a ~50/50 chance each charge to crit on all three attacks for x3 damage while using double their strength to damage from Horn of the Criosphinx.Probability goes to 60% crit chance at level 11.
Likewise, you can build a terrifying critical focused two weapon fighter using high crit range weapons; a level 11 hasted two weapon fighter has about an 80% chance of critting on all seven attacks.
With the style being clarified to working with IUS only, I'm happy with the power level - it finally lets unarmed monks be (useful) mobile combatants.
hate to break it to you, but the barbar/fighter can do all that already, without pummeling style. all Pum style does in that case is minimize dr. there was literally no reason for it to be banned.
Undone |
Considering neither build has any way of combining the two styles, it's dpr isn't greater than a standard Sacred fist. Even with a full 3 levels in MoMs, it just means a 1-2 more rounds of full-attacking provided you can charge. If this is the best they can come up with, then there wasn't anything to be afraid of to begin with.
Uh....
You shift between combat styles, combining them to increased effect.
Prerequisites: Improved Unarmed Strike, two or more style feats, base attack bonus +6 or monk level 5th.
Benefit: You can switch your style as a free action. At the start of combat, pick one of your styles. You start the combat in that style, even in the surprise round.
Normal: It takes a swift action to begin or switch your styles.
You most definitely can charge with 7 attacks at strength 2.5 at level 11, you won't because you'll be better off with IC than horn DPR wise but that's besides the point.
With the style being clarified to working with IUS only, I'm happy with the power level - it finally lets unarmed monks be (useful) mobile combatants.
Probability of critting unarmed strikes with IC.
2 hits - 19%
3 hits - 27.1%
4 hits - 34.39%
5 hits - 40.951%
6 hits - 46.8%
7 hits - 52.2%
The above are the listed chances to crit based on how many hits you get a time. Without improved critical for posterity sake.
2 hits - 9.75%
3 hits - 14.27%
4 hits - 18.54%
5 hits - 22.7%
6 hits - 27.5%
7 hits - 30.2%
Basically pummeling style is effectively improved critical that stacks with improved critical but at very high levels At 10 attacks the % critical is absurd.
hate to break it to you, but the barbar/fighter can do all that already, without pummeling style. all Pum style does in that case is minimize dr. there was literally no reason for it to be banned.
It feels like the magical knack banning. Knee jerk banned because it looked overpowered but people took a step back and looked at it reasonably and agreed it's fine.
9mm |
Quote:Considering neither build has any way of combining the two styles, it's dpr isn't greater than a standard Sacred fist. Even with a full 3 levels in MoMs, it just means a 1-2 more rounds of full-attacking provided you can charge. If this is the best they can come up with, then there wasn't anything to be afraid of to begin with.Uh....
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
go go imperfect memory! could have sworn that came at level 3. ce le vi. main point still stands though.
DrSwordopolis |
hate to break it to you, but the barbar/fighter can do all that already, without pummeling style. all Pum style does in that case is minimize dr. there was literally no reason for it to be banned.
Pounce, sure, but is there some way I'm not seeing that allows a crit on one attack count as a crit on all attacks in that full-attack-action?
Benefit: 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. You can only use Pummeling Style with unarmed strikes.
DrSwordopolis |
It feels like the magical knack banning. Knee jerk banned because it looked overpowered but people took a step back and looked at it reasonably and agreed it's fine.
Actually, what changed was the errata to Pummeling Style that specified that it only worked with unarmed strikes. While it was obvious what the designer intended, the pre-FAQ wording allowed for any weapon to be used in mega-pounce format. If the FAQ were revoked, I believe that many voices on the board would be asking for the ban to be reinstated.
kinevon |
Undone wrote:It feels like the magical knack banning. Knee jerk banned because it looked overpowered but people took a step back and looked at it reasonably and agreed it's fine.Actually, what changed was the errata to Pummeling Style that specified that it only worked with unarmed strikes. While it was obvious what the designer intended, the pre-FAQ wording allowed for any weapon to be used in mega-pounce format. If the FAQ were revoked, I believe that many voices on the board would be asking for the ban to be reinstated.
Without the FAQ, consider a TWF, using a high crit range weapon (15-20) in one hand, and a high crit multiplier weapon (x4) in his main hand.
One confirmed critical on the secondary weapon, and you get all attacks with the x4 weapon as crits, as well.
And I have heard complaints about Butterfly's Sting...
claudekennilol |
DrSwordopolis wrote:Undone wrote:It feels like the magical knack banning. Knee jerk banned because it looked overpowered but people took a step back and looked at it reasonably and agreed it's fine.Actually, what changed was the errata to Pummeling Style that specified that it only worked with unarmed strikes. While it was obvious what the designer intended, the pre-FAQ wording allowed for any weapon to be used in mega-pounce format. If the FAQ were revoked, I believe that many voices on the board would be asking for the ban to be reinstated.Without the FAQ, consider a TWF, using a high crit range weapon (15-20) in one hand, and a high crit multiplier weapon (x4) in his main hand.
One confirmed critical on the secondary weapon, and you get all attacks with the x4 weapon as crits, as well.
And I have heard complaints about Butterfly's Sting...
True, but I'm fairly certain I can say this, but Butterfly's Sting was never intended to work "for yourself". It merely does because you're your own ally. The question for Butterfly's Sting is whether or not you count as your own "next ally". Because of the FAQ, it's accepted that it works, but without the FAQ qualifying yourself as your own ally I don't think many GMs would allow it to work as it's accepted to work now.
My wife and I have a pair of characters that use it as it was intended to work. She uses a pair of kukris with the feat and I use a scythe. I feel it's pretty clear that this is what was intended when the feat was designed.
But to your point, yes, pummeling style with a kukri and a light pick would definitely be broken. (hence the errata)
Drake Brimstone |
You want an insane build? Ok, but if you use it, I am not responsible for your murder.
Tengu
With Bite and Claws
1 - Ftr:Brawler 1
2 - MoMS 1
3 - MoMS 2
4 - Ftr:Brawler 2
5 - WHW 1
6 - Ftr:Brawler 3
7 - WHW 2
8 - Ftr:Brawler 4
9 - Ftr:Brawler 5
10 - Ftr:Brawler 6
11 - MoMS 3
Feats
1 - WF: Claws, Feral Combat
2 - IUAS, Pummeling Style
3 - Pummeling Charge, WF: Bite
4 - Power Attack
5 - WF: Hair
6 - X
7 - Final Embrace
8 - WF: Gore
9 - WS: Claw
10 - WS: Bite
11 - WS: Gore
Required Magic Items
Helm of the Mammoth Lord (For Gore Attack)
Monk Robes (to increase dice for all attacks to 1d10 at level 11)
Amulet of Mighty Fists +2 Keen
Assuming by level 11 you have a 24 Strength, and a 14 Int
At level 11 you have
5 Primary Natural Attacks doing 1d10 damage + 20 (Power Attack + Strength* + AoMF + Brawler's Close Combatant + Weapon Spec for all but hair, but +2 from Int for Hair)
These are ALL at +18 to hit and a threat range of 19-20
By RAW, all attacks gain Grab and Constrict... not sure how that works on the Gore.
In a surprise round = Pummeling Charge + Constrict = up to 10d10 + 200 (or 184*) on a non-crit, 15d10 + 300 (or 276*) on a Crit.
Repeat this in regular rounds for surviving enemies.
You can be doing this "style" starting at level 3, but with lower damage and only 3 attacks, everything after is just increasing effectiveness.
*Some say you don't get your strength bonus with the hair, but the description says you add Int, not replace with Int. Expect table variance for the 8 points from strength for the Hair.
Artanthos |
You want an insane build? Ok, but if you use it, I am not responsible for your murder.
Tengu
** spoiler omitted **
You need to designate which single attack Feral Combat is being applied to.
Prerequisite: Improved Unarmed Strike, Weapon Focus with selected natural weapon.
Benefit: Choose one of your natural weapons. While using the selected natural weapon, you can apply the effects of feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, as well as effects that augment an unarmed strike.
Special: If you are a monk, you can use the selected natural weapon with your flurry of blows class feature.
The increased damage will apply only to the chosen natural attack.
In addition: Pummeling Style is only available for unarmed strikes, not natural weapons.
Drake Brimstone |
Fixed it, not "AS" Impressive
1 - Ftr:Brawler 1
2 - MoMS 1
3 - MoMS 2
4 - Ftr:Brawler 2
5 - Ftr:Brawler 3
6 - Ftr:Brawler 4
7 - Ftr:Brawler 5
8 - Ftr:Brawler 6
9 - Ftr:Brawler 7
10 - Ftr:Brawler 8
11 - MoMS 3
Feats
1 - WF: Claws, Feral Combat: Claw(Right)
2 - IUAS, Pummeling Style
3 - Pummeling Charge, Feral Combat: Claw(Left)
4 - WF: Bite
5 - Feral Combat: Bite
6 - Power Attack
7 - WF: Gore
8 - Feral Combat: Gore
9 - WS: Claw
10 - WS: Bite
11 - WS: Gore
Required Magic Items
Helm of the Mammoth Lord (For Gore Attack)
Monk Robes (to increase dice for all attacks to 1d10 at level 11)
Amulet of Mighty Fists +2 Keen
Assuming by level 11 you have a 24 Strength
At level 11 you have
4 Primary Natural Attacks at +20 doing 1d10 + 22 each with a threat range of 19-20. The damage drops significantly but is still a heck of a lot at 4d10 + 88 on a non-crit doubling to 8d10 +176 on a crit.
You could do more with keeping the WHW and dropping the Gore Attack and WS on the Bite but honestly, the constrict does confuse things a bit. (Damage would be just short of 50% more damage)
If you go a few levels beyond level 11, you can have all of it still.
I'm sure I could do better with more time.