This doesn't work.
Monkey Shine and Mouser only give their listed benefits when you enter an enemy's square by fulfilling the listed conditions (succeeding on a Stunning Fist and the Mouser thing that costs panache).
If your GM ruled otherwise... add some Vexing Dodger Rogue levels then.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Threads like this make me want to play Savage Worlds. :PIt is not the system that is the problem, merely the players...
I'm actually inclined to say it is a bit of both.
The more crunch is published for a system, the more likely unbalanced combinations are to arise. Obviously that doesn't mean that all simple systems are balanced, or that all complex systems are not -- just that the more stuff you throw in the pot, the harder it is to foresee every possible permutation.
Secret Wizard, I'm not seeing where Monkey Shines/Mouser rely on the ability use to proc the effect. They are authored with certain assumptions, but I don't believe that changes the RAW/RAI that other ways of entering an opponent's space could give you benefits.
+1 luck bonus from Jingasa
+1 deflection bonus from ring of 7 lovely colors
+1 insight bonus from ioun stone.
+4 dodge bonus if in enemy square.
Ah forgot both ring slots were already occupied.
so 34 CMD altogether. 38 while in an opponents space.
Well, I think the birdie may have a problem. It's a niche problem but it is the sort of problem that comes up on such hyper specialized builds.
Thoughts going forward:
Achieve this without relying on a magic item.
Don't go tiny. The trouble with tiny is you don't threaten any squares but your own making it exceedingly easy to mess with you. Which in turn makes it difficult to control the field enough that your AC has meaning.
You have no reliable means (i.e. no uncanny dodge) to keep yourself from being made flatfooted.
That's extremely hazardous as all that AC and CMD disappears the moment you go flat footed.
Frankly you can afford to lose some AC. At 46 AC it takes creatures who are far beyond your APL to hit you. So it'll either be a waste when even challenging encounters need 20's to hit you, or you're encouraging the gm to wipe your party. It's better to take some of that investment and put it into other things.
|
"especially since provoking every time you move in to attack will grant you an extra attack almost all of the time."
You don't have enough reach to hit back while in tiny form, because the AoO triggers when you try to move out from the treathened square, which is 5 ft away from the typical medium-sized enemy.
But with your Swashbuckler level you can just buy a 2.5k Swordmaster's Flair (blue scarf) to get +5ft reach as a swift action before polymorphing into a thrush:
http://archivesofnethys.com/MagicWondrousDisplay.aspx?FinalName=Swordmaster %27s%20Flair
Can you give a rundown where the 3+3 attacks come from? I'm not familiar with the slayer specifics.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seen it done with a Kitsune. Still funny. Funnier would be to sit at the table the first time the dread bird-tank encounters a Wind Wall. Boss with Fickle Winds would be even more of a troll...
I wasn't criticizing - I think these builds are genuinely funny. There's just a number of corner cases that make it even funnier in combat!
I GM'd for a Kitsune version of this who kept attempting to move into a boss's space. The boss was able to keep taking AoO's and, since it had grab, would grapple the poor Kitsune at 5 feet, outside the reach of the tiny PC. It pissed the player off to no end, since you'd think that if the enemy is touching you, you can attack the enemy, but that's not how the game works.
Making a tiny character does have strengths, but most players and GMs are used to dealing with medium, small, and large PCs. Tiny PCs, at least in terms of PFS frequency, are more of a recent development. There's bound to be strange situations!
|
|
So I am fully aware of the fact that being flatfooted is a danger to this build. However there are some ways of mitigating this.
Here is how in character I deal with that fact.
1. Sit on an arcane casters shoulder and pretend to be their familiar.
2. If you're willing to switch out Iroran paladin and lose the ac and save bonuses you can pick up the Torag trait defensive strategist which makes sure you are not flatfooted before you have a chance to act.
3. If an enemy does have the chance to attack you from surprise use the parrying riposte deed as an immediate action to counter.
Finally a note on the other traditional weakness of these builds. Penetrating DR. In this case I would upgrade the Amulet of mighty fists with the fury born enchantment which gives a stacking +1 bonus to the weapon up to 5 for each time an enemy has been hit.
After one round of full attacking if the thing is not dead all of your attacks are with +5 weapons penetrating all DR.
Another way of dealing with the issue of reach is picking up the lunge feat. If you combine that with the scarf this character can have 10 foot reach and be all sorts of fun.
|
|
You will have one natural attack. Also it will be virtually impossible to wield weapons as a songbird. You will still have your unarmed strike I suppose, which will deal 1d3+ a lot of damage, so you could use that (along with any iteratives from it) and your bite at a -5.
Claws of the Beast (Ex): You grow a pair of claws. These claws are primary attacks that deal 1d4 points of damage (1d3 if you are Small).While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form. You also lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function. While most of these should be obvious, the GM is the final arbiter of what abilities depend on form and are lost when a new form is assumed. Your new form might restore a number of these abilities if they are possessed by the new form.
David, I would argue that the Claws of the beast fit in the same category as the sorcerer claws, which are specifically allowed to transfer when you polymorph.
This build envisions using unarmed strike to attack a well as its iteratives.
|
|
I have been slowly building this concept with GM credit already. Obvious problems are the fact that you need two 4,000 gp purchases to make your build. I have been thinking about using Helpful Halfling and Bodyguard and making the build grant huge bonuses to the AC of my allies - the combination of Mouser Underfoot Assault & Bodyguard alone would give your allies + 8 AC potentially. I have been considering using a flurry of blows build as opposed to the natural weapon version, or maybe an Urban Barbarian version. An Urban Barbarian could get Spell Sunder to smash a wind wall!
Dot
Keep in mind your opponent provokes by attempting to move out of his square, which means you get the attack as he moves not once he has already moved.
Just like how with standing up from a trip you get the AoO while he is standing not once he has stood back up.
Also, don't forget to add an effective +4 to your AC/CMB against the opponent you are sharing a square with thanks to Mouser's -4 to hit penalty in addition to Monkey Shine's flat AC boost.
|
|
Keep in mind your opponent provokes by attempting to move out of his square, which means you get the attack as he moves not once he has already moved.
Just like how with standing up from a trip you get the AoO while he is
standingnot once he has stood back up.Also, don't forget to add an effective +4 to your AC/CMB against the opponent you are sharing a square with thanks to Mouser's -4 to hit penalty in addition to Monkey Shine's flat AC boost.
You mean while he is prone. While he is "standing up" wouldn't even be accurate here because you're still aiming at his prone AC.
This doesn't work.
Monkey Shine and Mouser only give their listed benefits when you enter an enemy's square by fulfilling the listed conditions (succeeding on a Stunning Fist and the Mouser thing that costs panache).
If your GM ruled otherwise... add some Vexing Dodger Rogue levels then.
Sort of
Underfoot Assault (Ex): At 1st level, if a foe whose size is larger than the mouser's is adjacent to her and misses her with a melee attack, the mouser can as an immediate action spend 1 panache point to move 5 feet into an area of the attacker's space. This movement does not count against the mouser's movement the next round, and it doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. While the mouser is within a foe's space, she is considered to occupy her square within that foe's space.
While the mouser is within her foe's space, the foe takes a –4 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks not made against the mouser, and all of the mouser's allies that are adjacent to both the foe and the mouser are considered to be flanking the foe.
A halfling would need to use underfoot assault to enter a medium creatures square. A tiny fox/birdtank would not, since you can share the squares of a creature two or more size catagories bigger than you. Once there, the second sentence is its own independent clause: its not just a new sentence its a new paragraph.. If you've got a mouser in your square, hitting anyone else takes a -4 penalty and moving takes an AOO (which is why i plan for step up when I do mine)
This doesn't work.
Monkey Shine and Mouser only give their listed benefits when you enter an enemy's square by fulfilling the listed conditions (succeeding on a Stunning Fist and the Mouser thing that costs panache).
If your GM ruled otherwise... add some Vexing Dodger Rogue levels then.
I'd be inclined to agree with this. It's similar to the whole Thunder & Fang fiasco where you're cherry-picking sentences out of a Feat to get the benefits you want while ignoring preceding clauses.
I'm a little less sure for the Mouser's Underfoot Assault, but it has similar "her foe" and "a foe" language. In this case "her foe" is the specific foe that missed, allowing her to enter its space. "A foe" is any foe.
JMHO, YMMV, NWEOI...
Anyway, there are arguments both ways in terms of RAW. My guess on intent is that they're not meant to be used independent of the triggering actions. Assume that GMs will bristle and try to find any possible loophole to keep this from trivializing all the encounters they've prepared.
Regardless of all that, I implore anyone planning to use a build like this to:
1) warn the GM of what you're bringing and what it's capable of doing.
2) explain to the party what your character does, and
3) explain to them all how, in spite of unhittable AC, massive saves and devastating damage, you promise to share the spotlight rather than turning the next four hours (or more realistically thirty minutes) into the Songbird Show.
There is no clause, at all. There is no argument for that interpretation, at all. Its just like reading share spells to not work.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Regardless of all that, I implore anyone planning to use a build like this to:
1) warn the GM of what you're bringing and what it's capable of doing.
2) explain to the party what your character does, and
3) explain to them all how, in spite of unhittable AC, massive saves and devastating damage, you promise to share the spotlight rather than turning the next four hours (or more realistically thirty minutes) into the Songbird Show.
/shrug. This build only works against 1 opponent at a time, just like how tetori grapplers work.
|
|
David, I would argue that the Claws of the beast fit in the same category as the sorcerer claws, which are specifically allowed to transfer when you polymorph.This build envisions using unarmed strike to attack a well as its iteratives.
Sorcerer claws explicitly grow and shrink as free actions and only last for rounds/day. They are also supernatural abilities that don't depend on your form.
Claws of the Beast is an extraordinary ability where you permanently grow claws on your hands.
I wouldn't use the sorcerer bloodline to defend your choice.
rage powers (any rage power with “dragon totem” in its title).
Benefit: While raging, the barbarian gains two claw attacks. These attacks are considered primary attacks and are made at the barbarian’s full base attack bonus. The claws deal 1d6 points of slashing damage (1d4 if Small) plus the barbarian’s Strength modifier.
They're grown temporarily, just like a sorcerers. Baring the barbarian rage cycling for the will save bonus vs the nightmare spell..
"especially since provoking every time you move in to attack will grant you an extra attack almost all of the time."
You don't have enough reach to hit back while in tiny form, because the AoO triggers when you try to move out from the treathened square, which is 5 ft away from the typical medium-sized enemy.
But with your Swashbuckler level you can just buy a 2.5k Swordmaster's Flair (blue scarf) to get +5ft reach as a swift action before polymorphing into a thrush:
http://archivesofnethys.com/MagicWondrousDisplay.aspx?FinalName=Swordmaster %27s%20Flair
Can you give a rundown where the 3+3 attacks come from? I'm not familiar with the slayer specifics.
These garish tokens usually take the form of a colorful clothing accessories. So long as a token is grasped in the user's off hand, she can spend 1 panache point to gain the use of a specific ability associated with the token.
I think that makes it a bit iffy working with a polymorph effect, unless you're an ape or a raccoon or something and have a party member hold it while you shift. Its not in your hand anymore.
|
They are permanent claws that are granted by a feat. Just as that feat would work for any ranger regardless of if they were a human, elf, or centaur, the feat will still provide claws if you are under a polymorph effect.
The feat is the source of your claws, not your original form, and that feat would still apply whilst under a polymorph effect.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hence the birth of the core campaign.
My dwarven druid polymorphs into a velociraptor. I charge pounce. My velociraptor charge pounces is both possible in core and far, far worse than this.
|
|
Regardless of all that, I implore anyone planning to use a build like this to:
1) warn the GM of what you're bringing and what it's capable of doing.
2) explain to the party what your character does, and
3) explain to them all how, in spite of unhittable AC, massive saves and devastating damage, you promise to share the spotlight rather than turning the next four hours (or more realistically thirty minutes) into the Songbird Show.That's good advice.
I would certainly agree. This character was originally designed because I was going to play all three bone keeps in one weekend at a con, and I therefore decided to design a character I felt would be most likely to survive that.
(On a side note, I will mention that this character was able to solo nearly 3/4 of bone keep 2, so the experiment was quite successful.)However I would certainly not recommend this build for normal PFS play, because it can cause some of those issues you discuss, and tried to add a disclaimer of that fact at the beginning.
This build falls into the same category as some of the other specialty builds like Musket master, Zen Archer, slumber witch, etc... that can ruin the play experience for others if you play it wrong.
|
|
I wouldn't call Zen Archer a specialty build. It's a good archer. It's a little behind fighter for pure damage, but it has the benefit of building itself. Yes, One slaughtered beastmass, but there were some build errors in that build that made it illegal, and 20th level play is hardly a benchmark for PFS.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
the whole Thunder & Fang fiasco*Ahem* What Thunder and Fang fiasco?
Will address your previous post here, too.
You have mastered the ancient Thunder and Fang fighting style, allowing you to fight with increased effectiveness when wielding an earth breaker and klar.
Prerequisite: Str 15, Two-Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus (earth breaker), Weapon Focus (klar)
Benefit: You can use an earth breaker as though it were a one-handed weapon. When using an earth breaker in one hand and a klar in your off hand, you retain the shield bonus your klar grants to your Armor Class even when you use it to attack. Treat your klar as a light weapon for the purposes of determining your two-weapon fighting penalty.
Normal: An earth breaker is a two-handed weapon, preventing the use of a klar in one hand without imposing penalties for using the earth breaker one-handed. A klar can be used either as a one-handed weapon or a shield; it does not grant a bonus to AC during rounds in which it is used as a weapon.
The fiasco I'm referring to is a several-hundred post thread debating whether the feat allows a medium character to wield a large earthbreaker (in two hands). The debate largely broke into three camps:
-yes, because of the first sentence in the feat. period
-no, for various reasons I won't go into, and
-probably, but it's pretty clearly not intended that way, as implied by the flavor text, the 'normal' text, and by someone who worked on the book stating as much.
I fell in the third camp, which is also my response to the items I noted earlier.
I'm not saying a tiny character can't take or use Monkey Shines. I'm saying it probably wasn't written with tiny characters in mind and the language is therefore not appropriately specific as to what it does and doesn't allow.
These to me aren't as obviously rule-bending as the Thunder & Fang example, but my gut says neither were fully vetted with tiny characters.
It falls into an area where in a home game, the GM can make their call and move on. In PFS, which is strictly RAW, a player can use something like this to twist the GM's arm behind his back and force a game-breaking build on an unsuspecting table.
I personally feel that if you find yourself telling a GM he has to allow something RAW, you're in the wrong, even when you're right. At a recent convention, I had an otherwise truly excellent GM tell me he doesn't really like to let people take 10 on knowledge checks. He's wrong. I know that, but I also rolled with it rather than causing a scene and grinding everything to a halt or escalating to a VO, because I'd rather play than be right.
Breq sounds like a decent fellow and his comments indicate he would handle this responsibly (or as responsibly as one can--a nuke is a nuke). My concern is more all the people saying "yes! can't wait to do this in PFS!" To use a wildly inappropriate and overblown metaphor, it's like leaving a loaded gun on the table for anyone to pick up.
I'm not saying people shouldn't post these. It's really impressive as a thought exercise. In fact, I'd rather have the information out there so I don't get blindsided by it. I'm just preaching temperance and trying to remind anyone interested in this that there are 3 - 7 other people at the table, and that they might want to play, too.
Anyway, I'll see if I can get Mark to weigh in on the practice of pulling sentences out of the context of feats. I suspect if I get an answer it will be something along the lines of "it's legal, but usually unintended. Handle with care."
redward:
1)Tiny charactersr aren't the only ones that can have a size difference big enough to waltz into someone's square. The class was practically written for halflings, and large creatures are pretty common.
2) Please don't accuse people of taking something from an entirely different paragraph out of context. Assuming context that isn't there can be just as bad, as people did to read share spells so it didn't work.
PFS is not as raw as people make it out to be sometimes.
3) Applying the context from paragraph 1 into paragraph 2 seems completely random. Why on earth would it matter HOW the mouser got into someone's square? There was ample opportunity to write that limiting factor into the text. It is imho not a legitimate interpretation at all.
I personally feel that if you find yourself telling a GM he has to allow something RAW, you're in the wrong, even when you're right. At a recent convention, I had an otherwise truly excellent GM tell me he doesn't really like to let people take 10 on knowledge checks. He's wrong. I know that, but I also rolled with it rather than causing a scene and grinding everything to a halt or escalating to a VO, because I'd rather play than be right.
1) There's a special bard ability to take 10 on knowledge checks that gets made less than useful by some of the take 10 clarifications. Checks from the board aren't nearly the same thing as the text in front of you.
2) Unless your character is built around taking 10 on knowledge checks its not the same thing. The character has to get into someone elses square, and even then its a -4 to attack other people. Whats the big deal? It is worth it to fight over a mechanic thats part of your core concept.
redward:
1)Tiny charactersr aren't the only ones that can have a size difference big enough to waltz into someone's square. The class was practically written for halflings, and large creatures are pretty common.
Agree it was practically written for halflings. Not sure what large creatures have to do with that. A creature has to be three sizes larger for you to enter its square and it still provokes AoOs.
2) Please don't accuse people of taking something from an entirely different paragraph out of context. Assuming context that isn't there can be just as bad, as people did to read share spells so it didn't work.
I'm not familiar with this particular controversy. I also never played 3.5, if it's relevant.
3) Applying the context from paragraph 1 into paragraph 2 seems completely random. Why on earth would it matter HOW the mouser got into someone's square? There was ample opportunity to write that limiting factor into the text.
If you're going to use the "or they wouldn't have written it that way" argument, the ACG is not the place to hang your hat.
1) There's a special bard ability to take 10 on knowledge checks that gets made less than useful by some of the take 10 clarifications. Checks from the board aren't nearly the same thing as the text in front of you.
Being able to take 10 in combat is never not useful.
2) Unless your character is built around taking 10 on knowledge checks its not the same thing. The character has to get into someone elses square, and even then its a -4 to attack other people. Whats the big deal? It is worth it to fight over a mechanic thats part of your core concept.
I think there's a huge difference between saying "nope, you can't do it" and "you can do it, but you have to use the method spelled out in the previous paragraph of the ability you are attempting to use.
Agree it was practically written for halflings. Not sure what large creatures have to do with that. A creature has to be three sizes larger for you to enter its square and it still provokes AoOs.
small, medium large.. huh. Thats only two. this is the problem with counting on your fingers when you don't have opposable thumbs...
I'm not familiar with this particular controversy. I also never played 3.5, if it's relevant.
It still comes up in pathfinder. (came up the other day which is why its on my mind)
Share Spells: The wizard may cast a spell with a target of “You” on his familiar (as a touch spell) instead of on himself. A wizard may cast spells on his familiar even if the spells do not normally affect creatures of the familiar's type (magical beast).
Some people read those together, saying it only works on spells with a target of you (which makes the second clause completely irrelevant for the first 14 years or so of its existance)
So the idea that you always apply the context from previous SENTENCES doesn't always pan out, much less separate paragraphs.
If you're going to use the "or they wouldn't have written it that way" argument, the ACG is not the place to hang your hat.
Then you've got to give me something here. You're asking me to prove a negative when there's no evidence for the positive.
I think there's a huge difference between saying "nope, you can't do it" and "you can do it, but you have to use the method spelled out in the previous paragraph of the ability you are attempting to use.
Its a completely random ruling with no justification.
It relies on the dm swinging at the character, something that may not happen for a round or two or, indeed, within the lifetime of the monster. MANY dms will metagame the heck out of that the same way they will a swashbuckler or high ac character and just not swing at them.
It flunks every test of rules interpretation i can think of.
Is your ruling raw? clearly not. It specifies when you're in the space, not when you've used x ability to get in a creatures space.
Is it overpowered? No. Its a -4 to hit other party members. It doesn't work on a lot of badguys- my fireball doesn't care WHAT my hit penalty is. There's dozens of other ways of doing this and worse effects, along with a really obvious solution: just hit the mouser. This is far, far less limiting than being grappled or even tripped.
Does it make any realistic sense? No. there's no reason that an underfoot mouser thats been in your square for 10 rounds is more annoying because you swung at him 30 seconds ago. Why on earth would it matter HOW the mouser got in the square?
Are there any other indicators of intent? None that I see.
I think its more than fair to put the onus on he DM to have a better rational for overriding raw than what you have here.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a bit surprised nobody's mentioned that Irori might not exactly be thrilled that his "paladin" has abandoned seeking mastery of his own body and instead flies around as a songbird whenever it seems he'd be facing a challenge to which he could better master and apply his true physical form.
To me, that'd be the scariest consequence of going this route - running into the GM who really holds this PC to Irori's tenets.
It would probably make sense to have a build that doesn't invest in the paladin levels in that case (which is totally doable).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Punching with a fist is too easy, I will knock you out with a feather?
|
|
I'm a bit surprised nobody's mentioned that Irori might not exactly be thrilled that his "paladin" has abandoned seeking mastery of his own body and instead flies around as a songbird whenever it seems he'd be facing a challenge to which he could better master and apply his true physical form.
To me, that'd be the scariest consequence of going this route - running into the GM who really holds this PC to Irori's tenets.
It would probably make sense to have a build that doesn't invest in the paladin levels in that case (which is totally doable).
People have already mentioned doing this with a Kitsune and turning into a fox. I guess you could also do this by playing a Tengu and turning into a crow. Or you could take a few levels in Druid and wildshape into any tiny animal you want: a songbird, a bat, a small-mouth bass. You could take the Wild Speech Feat instead of a Ring of Eloquence, and one of those class abilities instead of of 7 beauties thing.
That would address both your problem of it not being in the spirit of Irori, because using a class/race ability and feats instead of a magic item or 2 you will still be mastering your own body instead of some other. And it addresses my problem that feats and abilities are easier to get than expensive magic items.
Except there is no way to multiclass paladin/druid without being an ex-paladin or an ex-druid.
You could be a Feral Hunter or a Lunar/Wood oracle though.