|
Other points aside, I'm very impressed with your in-depth knowledge of the demographics of the player base. To know exactly what every player with one of these rings is using it for, across all of PFS? Now that is impressive.Especially since I don't particularly recall anyone else saying anything about this being abused with any great frequency.
Of course, I'm also trying to figure out why this is really that much worse than a fox form kitsune with a potion of fly, or overland flight from a scroll. I mean, yeah, people aren't going to ignore a flying fox, but people don't generally ignore a songbird indoors or underground, either. Also, that fox can pop in and out of animal form at will, has no time limits, better flight maneuverability, etc.
Yeah and it costs them significant;y more to do it. 3 potions of fly cost more than the ring, let alone the difference in price of the ring and a ring of protection (+1).
Don't get me wrong I think the fox-form kitsune is ridiculous OP too (and am hoping the trait in Blood of Beast that makes it doable at 1st level doesn't make it), but in comparison the ring is generally worse.
Venture-Captain, Minnesota
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let me be clear. I am not saying this player is abusive. He isn't. He's using a 100% PFS-legal item in conjunction with 100% PFS-legal classes, archetypes, feats, and other items to produce an effect that is far greater than the sum of it's parts. In a lot of ways, I admire his work- it's an excellent example of theory-crafting.
Theory-crafting is really nifty. It stimulates critical thinking, teaches the rules, exercises creativity, etc. But when theory-crafting moves from the forum to the table, the results are often unintentionally harmful.
My local player himself has stated that he wished that the ring would be errata-ed so that he could sell it back for full value, because he himself agrees that the ring is too powerful when used offensively. But I can completely understand his not wanting to give up the ring and eat the diminished re-sale value.
You and I have different views of abusive. Just because something's legal, it does not mean it's not abusive. If you are trampling everyone else's fun and making adventures a cakewalk with no regard for the fun of others, you're abusive.
It especially bothers me that he KNOWS that the ring is causing problems at the table. This isn't a player who is somehow missing the social clues of his fellow party members. This is someone who is aware of that dynamic, but continues to use the ring offensively, hoping for a ban so that he can sell it back full price.
In the Minnesota Lodge, the venture officers have chats with those players asking them to please tone things down. Just because you have the ring doesn't mean that you have to use it every combat. Heck, I've had this talk to players who did not play well with others. (Though, not about the ring. I've honestly never seen the ring abused over here.)
Also keep in mind fly checks, area of effect spells and the fact that songbirds aren't found in dungeons and would be considered delicious by most monsters. We cannot add monsters in PFS, but there's nothing wrong with the flying creatures that are already present in a given adventure going after that songbird.
What about this:
What if, instead of asking for a ban of the ring, or an errata drastically inflating the price, we instead ask for something (probably in the Campaign Clarification document)...
I'd support this compromise, but can we as a campaign dictate how an item gets used by players? We never have before.
Hmm
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't feel like a ban is the answer.
The price is a little low. I would counsel maybe making it on par with the other polymorph effect items.
Maybe a slight nerf to the abusive parts. Mandate that it can't be used to make attacks with blah blah blah or something along those lines. (Sorry, I am grumpy and my coffee hasn't kicked in yet, but I felt the need to voice my opinion; rarrr, I am person hear me talk)
This item is greatly flavorful, with unanticipated combat benefits. Nerf the unanticipated part, and let those paladins of Shelyn be happy little birds. (Bob Ross would be proud).
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't get me wrong I think the fox-form kitsune is ridiculous OP too (and am hoping the trait in Blood of Beast that makes it doable at 1st level doesn't make it), but in comparison the ring is generally worse.
You wind up with a damage dealer that has a lot of good mobility but has a little more trouble with DR and the attack or move dichotomy (and gets a lot of aoos). It's really not any worse than most two handed barbarian builds.
|
|
I have a local player with this ring. It makes his otherwise 'glass canon' PC nearly untouchable, allowing him to stealthily get to the BBEG (or anything else), get a massive sneak attack off, and (usually) remain nearly un-hittable- at least long enough for him to escape.I am not clear how he is doing this? Being tiny gives you a big stealth bonus but a tiny creature still needs cover or concealment to stealth at all. Given he also needs to enter his targets square to attack those two things definitely seem rather incompatible.
Sneak up on bad guy
Surprise round: CHARGE thwack. Sneak attack
Win init: Thwack, sneak attack
Have a high ac. Get swung at once.
Flying withdraw, or just have a dex based character mage armor barkskin and a few other goodies.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sneak up on bad guyIn my experience things fall down at this point as the rest of your party are unlikely to be very stealthy.
Also that sneaking up thing often requires you to do things like open doors, something tiny songbirds are not well suited to doing.
Also areas routinely lack any form of cover.
Some groups allow scouting, some don't. But scouting has its own dangers, especially at the levels where True Seeing opponents become moderately common.
Some GMs are also much more strict about how much cover a tiny songbird needs than are others.
But lets face it, allowing a rogue to get his sneak attacks off on a regular basis really isn't game breaking. Even when sneak attacking they'll rarely match the heavy hitter in straight damage.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a local player with this ring. It makes his otherwise 'glass canon' PC nearly untouchable, allowing him to stealthily get to the BBEG (or anything else), get a massive sneak attack off, and (usually) remain nearly un-hittable- at least long enough for him to escape.I am not clear how he is doing this? Being tiny gives you a big stealth bonus but a tiny creature still needs cover or concealment to stealth at all. Given he also needs to enter his targets square to attack those two things definitely seem rather incompatible.Sneak up on bad guy
Surprise round: CHARGE thwack. Sneak attack
Win init: Thwack, sneak attack
Have a high ac. Get swung at once.
Flying withdraw, or just have a dex based character mage armor barkskin and a few other goodies.
FWIW, just wanted to mention that withdrawing would still provoke. Since the songbird is tiny he has to be in his opponent's square. So, when he withdraws he is leaving two threatened squares (bad guy's square plus the adjacent square).
|
Venture-Agent, Missouri—St. Louis
|
I have a local player with this ring. It makes his otherwise 'glass canon' PC nearly untouchable, allowing him to stealthily get to the BBEG (or anything else), get a massive sneak attack off, and (usually) remain nearly un-hittable- at least long enough for him to escape.I am not clear how he is doing this? Being tiny gives you a big stealth bonus but a tiny creature still needs cover or concealment to stealth at all. Given he also needs to enter his targets square to attack those two things definitely seem rather incompatible.
1 level dip into Mouser Swashbuckler, probably. Lets you enter the enemy's square if they miss you, and you always flank the target if there's any adjacent allies. They also provoke if they attempt to move out of your square.
|
Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
Yep, I pretty much agree with you. I have run for several songbirds of doom, even prior the MoMS change and have yet to be disruptive. Yes they can do a fair bit of damage with some decent defences but so do barbarians and zen archers. Frankly if your martials are not putting out a lot of damage or doing something similarly effective then I do wonder why bring them. I suspect too often people are comparing damage outputs to what you see from terrible sword and board types who hit like wet noodles while not doing much else very effective.Some groups allow scouting, some don't. But scouting has its own dangers, especially at the levels where True Seeing opponents become moderately common.
Some GMs are also much more strict about how much cover a tiny songbird needs than are others.
But lets face it, allowing a rogue to get his sneak attacks off on a regular basis really isn't game breaking. Even when sneak attacking they'll rarely match the heavy hitter in straight damage.
I agree. Its not the most absurd martial build that you can play. My favorite is the martial build that effectively turns the entire party invincible.
|
|
Whenever there are tiny creatures involved, I always get the urge to just change the scale of the grid to 2.5 foot squares and roll with normal rules instead of using rules for sharing squares.
I never actually do it...but I get awfully tempted.
I've been playing in a more or less Pathfinder game where we're all playing Awakened Ravens. That is exactly how we handled it, its the only thing that makes sense.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
After months of digestion on this, I think what irritates me the most about it is that it lets you wild shape better than a level 20 druid, since they never gain access to beast shape IV through wild shape. Just grinds my gears, I guess.Except it really doesn't. Since you're turning into an animal and NOT a magical beast you get the effect of Beast Shape 2 despite the fact that for some unknown reason you're using Beast Shape 4 to do so.
Another case of either bad editing or Paizo not understanding their own rule system.
Hmm. Yeah that is super odd. I will admit I thought it granted a +8 Dex bonus, but you're right--you aren't turning into a magical beast so you'd use BS2.
Stupid Shelynites, always going for form over function and confusing people like me that don't read things.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Regardless of builds, regardless of abuse, 4,000 gp for an item that lets you fly for 70 minutes a day is underpriced.
6 scrolls of Beast Shape 4 would cost. 9,900 gp and give you 66 minutes of flight time. But if you're turning into a raven, you could just use Beast Shape 2. So to get a scroll of that is 700 gp and lasts for 7 minutes. So you'd need 10 of them to get 70 minutes which would cost 7,000 gp.
It is cheaper if you go with scrolls of fly. They're 375 gp each and last 5 minutes. So that's only 5,250 gp for 70 minutes of flight time. But then you're not a bird. Which is worse? Or not. I don't know.
Honestly, if we don't care about being a bird, a scroll of overland flight is probably the best way to go. It only costs 1,125 gp and last 60 minutes. But chances are you'll have to UMD it or make a caster level check, which isn't an option for some martials.
But for all these options you'll need to rebuy them the next day. You don't need to with seven colors.
Oh, and add a ring of deflection +1 for another 2,000 gp to all these costs.
|
Honestly, if we don't care about being a bird, a scroll of overland flight is probably the best way to go. It only costs 1,125 gp and last 60 minutes. But chances are you'll have to UMD it or make a caster level check, which isn't an option for some martials.
Overland Flight is hours per level, so at caster level 9, you would get 9 hours of flight.
|
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Regardless of builds, regardless of abuse, 4,000 gp for an item that lets you fly for 70 minutes a day is underpriced.
I definitely agree that it is underpriced but you can't just say that it lets you fly. For the great majority of characters there are some VERY significant downsides to being beast shaped into a songbird. Unless you have specifically built for it you're essentially useless in combat.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
*shrugs* I've said what I wanted to. People are pretty entrenched and I'm not going to be changing minds. It's like arguing over your favorite sport team at this point. We're entitled to our opinions. It is what it is and it's not going away. It's legal in PFS.
Developer
|
Didn't expect to see this thread bumped again. You can read my story on the use of this ring on page 5.
It completely ruined a game night for me and made it very awkward. I thought I had finally found an item to use to fly in tier 7-9 games while my brawler/rogue was saving up for Celestial Armor. In retrospect, I wish I just bought some potions of Fly, or scrolls of Beastform. But my wealth had taken significant hits after a TPK caused by a Barbarian smashing a mcguffin in an earlier scenerio when the rest of the party was investigating, so I was eager to save money wherever I could. Plus I keep giving away 50 GP books to NPCs, but that's neither here nor there.
The scouting was more or less fine. The rest of the party was less than a move action behind me and joined the combat post-haste. The attempted attack made my GM feel awkward and it was ruled on the spot that a bird shouldn't be able to do that much damage. I accepted his ruling without argument, doing 1 or 2 damage with my peck, and continued the combat on foot, unable to reach any enemies with my unarmed strikes as they were all flying. I understand PFS is "RAW", but I don't like confronting GMs or causing uneasiness at tables, so I let my GM do his thing and talk to him about it before the next game, if I play the same character.
I agree that the ring is completely overpowered in combat as an offensive item. The closest I've come to using it since was flying from one roof-top to another looking for a sniper, then spending the Standard Action as a Kitsune to transform out of Bird Form so I can actually fight. The rest of the party were casters, save for one archer, so I was the only one who had to actually spend move actions to position myself next to the opponent, so no one really thought much of it in terms of "he's breaking the module". But aside from that, it has been regulated to a scouting and emergency escape button.
Once the Additional Resources are updated, I'm totally using my Gencon GM Boon to completely rebuild the out of date character in preparation for Eyes of the Ten and I'll never have to deal with the stupid thing again. At least as a player.
As a GM I think it's total cheese and I wish it were banned or regulated to non-combat only. Admittedly, that bonus to stealth and ability to fly outside of combat still makes it under costed, and the inability to dismiss the effect on you without the shapechanger subtype makes it a potential source of grief for players who I can see assuming they can just end the effect early.
|
|
That isn't a ruling. That's willfully contravening rules to nerf a character because it doesn't fit the GM's perception of balance. It's exactly the kind of thing you're not supposed to do when GMing for PFS.
To be clear: your problem there is not with the ring, it is with a GM flagrantly violating the spirit of PFS: legal options should be legal at every table.
You are very much mistaken.
The rule in question specifically states that the GM should decide what abilities the new form retains. I do not think it AT ALL unreasonable for a GM to rule that a tiny songbird cannot physically perform complex humanoid martial arts moves.
You may disagree with such a ruling, but claiming that it is not a ruling at all is simply false.
|
|
That isn't a ruling. That's willfully contravening rules to nerf a character because it doesn't fit the GM's perception of balance. It's exactly the kind of thing you're not supposed to do when GMing for PFS.
To be clear: your problem there is not with the ring, it is with a GM flagrantly violating the spirit of PFS: legal options should be legal at every table.
You are very much mistaken.
The rule in question specifically states that the GM should decide what abilities the new form retains. I do not think it AT ALL unreasonable for a GM to rule that a tiny songbird cannot physically perform complex humanoid martial arts moves.
You may disagree with such a ruling, but claiming that it is not a ruling at all is simply false.
Except the ruling was not about complex maneuvers, it was about how much damage a creature could do. And that is something that is spelled out in black and white with no room for interpretation.
|
|
That isn't a ruling. That's willfully contravening rules to nerf a character because it doesn't fit the GM's perception of balance. It's exactly the kind of thing you're not supposed to do when GMing for PFS.
To be clear: your problem there is not with the ring, it is with a GM flagrantly violating the spirit of PFS: legal options should be legal at every table.
You are very much mistaken.
The rule in question specifically states that the GM should decide what abilities the new form retains. I do not think it AT ALL unreasonable for a GM to rule that a tiny songbird cannot physically perform complex humanoid martial arts moves.
You may disagree with such a ruling, but claiming that it is not a ruling at all is simply false.
We have rules saying all creatures can make an unarmed strike.
So sure, it's a ruling. But a ruling the GM is not legally able to make/enforce in PFS.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That isn't a ruling. That's willfully contravening rules to nerf a character because it doesn't fit the GM's perception of balance. It's exactly the kind of thing you're not supposed to do when GMing for PFS.
To be clear: your problem there is not with the ring, it is with a GM flagrantly violating the spirit of PFS: legal options should be legal at every table.
You are very much mistaken.
The rule in question specifically states that the GM should decide what abilities the new form retains. I do not think it AT ALL unreasonable for a GM to rule that a tiny songbird cannot physically perform complex humanoid martial arts moves.
You may disagree with such a ruling, but claiming that it is not a ruling at all is simply false.
We have rules saying all creatures can make an unarmed strike.
So sure, it's a ruling. But a ruling the GM is not legally able to make/enforce in PFS.
There's a major difference between an unarmed strike, and a monk's martial art.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If it's one thing i've learned from cartoons over the years, it's that tiny little songbirds absolutely can perform complex martial arts moves.
Except when they're voiced by Dom Deluise.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is the monk my mother?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
trying to apply the same logic to someone that has been magically transformed into a bird in a world with magic and supernatural powers and supermen that you apply to a real world bird with 0 fantastical elements is asinine and pointless. The two have nothing to do with each other, just like rules for a game have nothing to do with how things work in the real world.
There's a major difference between an unarmed strike, and a monk's martial art.What are you saying? A monk makes an unarmed strike. A bird makes an unarmed strike. What difference is there?
A monk makes an IMPROVED Unarmed Strike whose damage is based on class levels.
A thrush only has a natural weapon which does at most 1d2–5 damage.
A monk can not make it's attacks in an altered form.
There's a major difference between an unarmed strike, and a monk's martial art.What are you saying? A monk makes an unarmed strike. A bird makes an unarmed strike. What difference is there?A monk makes an IMPROVED Unarmed Strike whose damage is based on class levels.
A thrush only has a natural weapon which does at most 1d2–5 damage.
A thrush can make an unarmed strike per the rules for unarmed strikes.
|
|
There's a major difference between an unarmed strike, and a monk's martial art.What are you saying? A monk makes an unarmed strike. A bird makes an unarmed strike. What difference is there?A monk makes an IMPROVED Unarmed Strike whose damage is based on class levels.
A thrush only has a natural weapon which does at most 1d2–5 damage.
A monk makes Unarmed strikes. He has the feat, IUS to not provoke for doing so.
He transforms into a bird.He still has the feat.
He's still able to make IUS since, as the rules state, all creatures can make US. The vast majority of creatures don't make US or list them since it's such a bad option for them. But all creatures can make US.
So he has a natural weapon which does 1d2 damage, and his IUS which can be done in addition to his natural attack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a major difference between an unarmed strike, and a monk's martial art.What are you saying? A monk makes an unarmed strike. A bird makes an unarmed strike. What difference is there?A monk makes an IMPROVED Unarmed Strike whose damage is based on class levels.
A thrush only has a natural weapon which does at most 1d2–5 damage.
A monk makes Unarmed strikes. He has the feat, IUS to not provoke for doing so.
He transforms into a bird.
He still has the feat.
He's still able to make IUS since, as the rules state, all creatures can make US. The vast majority of creatures don't make US or list them since it's such a bad option for them. But all creatures can make US.
So he has a natural weapon which does 1d2 damage, and his IUS which can be done in addition to his natural attack.
Creatures that use natural attacks are NOT using unarmed strikes. An unarmed strike is a strike made by a creature, such as a Human that has no natural weapons, or special training.
What you're also forgetting is that monk damage is based on Size. That's why there are different damage tables for small, medium, and large. A thrush is size Diminutive. Monk damage tables don't exist for something that's three size categories below Small.
|
|
trying to apply the same logic to someone that has been magically transformed into a bird in a world with magic and supernatural powers and supermen that you apply to a real world bird with 0 fantastical elements is asinine and pointless.
If I were running some kind of 'Kung fu Panda' campaign or adventure where the limitations of animal anatomy and/or basic laws of physics are out the window then sure... deadly ninja songbirds, acrobatic trees, singing bardic earthworms, what have you.
However, for any game even tenuously linked to reality, you ask me if a tiny bird can combine three different highly specialized forms of humanoid combat training and the answer is going to be an obvious hell no. Not anatomically possible.
|
|
Could you please point out where crane style (for example) requires opposable thumbs? How about limbs in general? No? How do we even know what crane style looks like other then the mechanics?trying to apply the same logic to someone that has been magically transformed into a bird in a world with magic and supernatural powers and supermen that you apply to a real world bird with 0 fantastical elements is asinine and pointless.If I were running some kind of 'Kung fu Panda' campaign or adventure where the limitations of animal anatomy and/or basic laws of physics are out the window then sure... deadly ninja songbirds, acrobatic trees, singing bardic earthworms, what have you.
However, for any game even tenuously linked to reality, you ask me if a tiny bird can combine three different highly specialized forms of humanoid combat training and the answer is going to be an obvious hell no. Not anatomically possible.
There are plenty of animal styles in real-life Kung fu.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
However, for any game even tenuously linked to reality, you ask me if a tiny bird can combine three different highly specialized forms of humanoid combat training and the answer is going to be an obvious hell no. Not anatomically possible.
Assuming we are discussing Pathfinder, I find it hard to find a tenuous link to reality.
trying to apply the same logic to someone that has been magically transformed into a bird in a world with magic and supernatural powers and supermen that you apply to a real world bird with 0 fantastical elements is asinine and pointless.If I were running some kind of 'Kung fu Panda' campaign or adventure where the limitations of animal anatomy and/or basic laws of physics are out the window then sure... deadly ninja songbirds, acrobatic trees, singing bardic earthworms, what have you.
However, for any game even tenuously linked to reality, you ask me if a tiny bird can combine three different highly specialized forms of humanoid combat training and the answer is going to be an obvious hell no. Not anatomically possible.
What if the bird is magic?
|
|
Creatures that use natural attacks are NOT using unarmed strikes. An unarmed strike is a strike made by a creature, such as a Human that has no natural weapons, or special training.
What you're also forgetting is that monk damage is based on Size. That's why there are different damage tables for small, medium, and large. A thrush is size Diminutive. Monk damage tables don't exist for something that's three size categories below Small.
You are correct. But no one ever said that natural attacks were unarmed strikes. An unarmed strike is a strike made with a non-weapon. The rules say all creatures can make unarmed strikes. Dragons, tigers, hedgehogs, and thrushes, all can make Unarmed strikes. Dragons, thrushes and tigers would rather use their natural weapons since those are more effective than an US or doing US and their natural attack. Hedgehogs, if they wanted to attack could only use an US.
I'm not forgetting that at all, nor is it relevant.
|
|
I am starting to feel like the old Reese's peanut butter cups commercial. "Hey, who's sticking reality into my fantasy?"
There are things much harder to believe in this game than a bird that does martial arts.
So when the rules call for the GM to decide what the new form can and cannot do they should be guided not by reality but... what? Where is the source which lays out what sorts of abilities we should pretend creatures have when they do not?
In any case, my original point was simply that these decisions are explicitly left to the GM. Thus making the claim that there is no room for GM interpretation inherently false. If you want to adopt a particular standard of make believe to follow you can do so... but a GM following reality is NOT "willfully contravening rules" or "flagrantly violating the spirit of PFS".
The item says "the wearer can use Beast Shape 4 to transform into a a songbird for 10 minutes (use statistics for a raven)."
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am starting to feel like the old Reese's peanut butter cups commercial. "Hey, who's sticking reality into my fantasy?"
There are things much harder to believe in this game than a bird that does martial arts.
So when the rules call for the GM to decide what the new form can and cannot do they should be guided not by reality but... what? Where is the source which lays out what sorts of abilities we should pretend creatures have when they do not?
In any case, my original point was simply that these decisions are explicitly left to the GM. Thus making the claim that there is no room for GM interpretation inherently false. If you want to adopt a particular standard of make believe to follow you can do so... but a GM following reality is NOT "willfully contravening rules" or "flagrantly violating the spirit of PFS".
A GM willfully attempting to destroy a character's effectiveness because he doesn't like it just because he has the phrase, "but the final decision is up to your GM." Does violate the spirit of PFS, and does happen. This is a problem with the core rulebook and following pathfinder rules being spelled out for home groups where they work things out and make it work, not a consistent org play environment.
However, in a world where animals can learn to speak and become sentient, Dragons somehow fly with those bodies, you can wiggle your fingers to make holes in the ground, and people can run as fast as Usain Bolt for an hour, I find the idea that a bird can't smack people upside the head silly. Should the fists somehow be appropriately sized for a diminuitive monk, sure. But if polymorphing worked how you imply, you would never be able to cast, or rage, or throw Hexs while in other forms, and I simply see no reason why you couldn't.