Korvosa Unchained - CotCT playtesting new rules (Inactive)

Game Master Darkness Rising

Unchained Rules | Loot List


101 to 150 of 240 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:


I can cast a spell, start a song, and swing a sword all in one round, right?

Unfortunately, no. Casting a spell is always 2 acts. :(

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Tyenar "Whisper" Checkeredpage wrote:
Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:


I can cast a spell, start a song, and swing a sword all in one round, right?
Unfortunately, no. Casting a spell is always 2 acts. :(

Hmm, ok, start a song and cast a spell then? That's something a Bard cannot normally do until 7th level.


Yup, that works!


I would like to try it out at some point, but you're right. It would take a lot of work for you. So I think it comes down to figuring out how much you want to put into it.


DM Unchained wrote:
Fighting Chicken wrote:
your idea of making some swift actions into free actions would be a necessary house rule, in my opinion.

That's the problem - I'll end up having to go through every.single.one of the swift actions (tiefling's prehensile tail? Slayer's level 7 study target? Swift poisoning? Spending a ki point? Bardic performance?) to decide what to do with them. Azih and I can't even work out how the RAW should be interpreted on flurry of blows, so trying to work out the actual intent for everything else is going to be a complete 'mare!

Hmm. In that case, I think there's two options.

1) Every previous swift action is now a free action. It would save you time and we'd still get to try the system out, but I'm sure will have unintended consequences.

2) Do away with the action economy test. This would also save you time, and we all know the system.


I'd rather not use the revised action economy. It's seems like more work for less so far.

I'm up in the air on what to play now though. There's the alchemist or the witch. Both could have Brew Potion at first level easily, but looking at DMIC without another person to help it's going to be even more expensive to make potions that way. 75% to brew instead of the usual 50%...


DMU: I was listening to the Know Direction podcast that recorded the Paizocon session on Unchained rules and the designers basically said that a lot of stuff in the revised action economy is left to the DM to handle as they didn't go through and fit all the years of old rules about swift actions, full attack actions etc. onto the three act per round revised system. They really left a lot to RAI here. Any class dependant on swift actions is going to be harder to handle than the flurry :p

It's up to you. I think it might be a fun thing to try and maybe drop if it's not working out?

About the flurry:

The thing about the section of the book on page 103 is that it's talking about the old standard/chained flurry of blows rule that was mimicking TWF in a kinda convoluted way. The new unchained flurry of blows isn't handled. This is simply an extra attack at highest bonus at level 1 and another extra attack at highest bonus at level 11 when doing a full attack action. The unchained flurry rule is very clear that these are meant to stack with any extra haste attack as well as the extra attack from spending ki.

One possibilities I can see to fit the unchained flurry is the one I proposed with the second attack losing the penalty at level 1 and the third attack losing the penalty at level 11. That's the examples I put in there with haste and ki spend examples included.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Personally, my vote it to drop the Revised Action Economy. However, as I am planning on creating an Unchained Monk, I see the problem. Really, there are two problems. Either you force swift action people to use "1 action", which effectively puts them behind the non-swift using classes, or you turn it into a free action, which results in the swift using classes getting a big bonus over the non-swifts.

My thought would be to leave swift actions as swift actions. Use the 3-action system as it is, but also leave the swift actions as they are, 1 per round. This would not penalize those classes that use swift actions. If someone wishes to use a more than 1 swift action, then the second (third? fourth?) would take up actual action slots. For instance, this would enable a higher level bard to start a performance (swift), use Arcane Armor Training (swift in an action slot), and then cast a spell (2 actions) all in 1 round.

Thus, you would get 1 swift/immediate (if you use it as an Immediate, you lose it as a swift). And you also get your normal AoO (with extras from Combat Reflexes). Then, during your turn, you get the three actual actions.

While this seems to work, personally, I think that Paizo needs to take this one back to the drawing board. It seems that they are trying to cram an established system into a new ruleset. It will probably work, with a bit of a learning curve, but is going to invariably keep having new hiccups as we level and get new class abilities.

Thus, my vote is to ditch the Revised Action Economy, although I would like to see it work if we can figure out all the unanswered variables.


Azih wrote:

DMU: I was listening to the Know Direction podcast that recorded the Paizocon session on Unchained rules and the designers basically said that a lot of stuff in the revised action economy is left to the DM to handle as they didn't go through and fit all the years of old rules about swift actions, full attack actions etc. onto the three act per round revised system. They really left a lot to RAI here. Any class dependant on swift actions is going to be harder to handle than the flurry :p

It's up to you. I think it might be a fun thing to try and maybe drop if it's not working out?

About the flurry:

The thing about the section of the book on page 103 is that it's talking about the old standard/chained flurry of blows rule that was mimicking TWF in a kinda convoluted way. The new unchained flurry of blows isn't handled. This is simply an extra attack at highest bonus at level 1 and another extra attack at highest bonus at level 11 when doing a full attack action. The unchained flurry rule is very clear that these are meant to stack with any extra haste attack as well as the extra attack from spending ki.

One possibilities I can see to fit the unchained flurry is the one I proposed with the second attack losing the penalty at level 1 and the third attack losing the penalty at level 11. That's the examples I put in there with haste and ki spend examples included.

But then the monk loses all the extra attacks from bab.

Another option is making flurry a two action attack that gives you 1 or 2 extra attacks based on level. The third action could be used as an extra attack at -5 or a ki point spent first to gain an extra attack at full bab.


YanJieming wrote:
But then the monk loses all the extra attacks from bab.

Unless I'm very wrong EVERYBODY loses the extra attacks from BAB in the revised action system and gains three actions which they can use to attack three times if they want.


I actually want to keep the revised action economy. Of course, it seems the general consensus is strikingly against that.

I really don't see how people are getting that certain classes are being punished or not punished. I mean, even if you use a swift action you can still attack twice, attack and move, or cast a spell, etc.

I like the new system because it is less limiting to low level characters (for example, it makes my necromancer-knight concept work really well) and prevents higher level characters from totally breaking the action economy. Plus, "standing around and full-attacking" isn't the default strategy of full BAB martials anymore. There are actually other, viable strategies one can take.

Perhaps a compromise is to drop the Revised Action Economy rules and use the "Removing Iterative Attacks" rules?

Also, I saw that someone said earlier that they believed Arcane Strike to no longer be viable. I kind of wanted to get a little more discussion on that, as that is a feat that was fairly important to my build and I don't see how it's bad (especially with the new stamina rules).


That is a reasonable point. Three flexible actions should be stronger in many ways than the Swift/Move/Standard setup of the standard system.


I think that what might be missing, and has been sort of referenced in several posts above, is that they seem to be missing a "Full Attack" option. It could be a 2 action complex action, sort of like spell casting. This would allow the high BAB characters, and Monks with their Flurry, to use their abilities, but would not result in the strange confusion of what happens when a fighter gets a third, or fourth, iterative attack.


But there are no iterative attacks under the new system, that's the thing. I'll admit, the unchained monks flurry has apparently presented a good deal of confusion.

What would adding a full-attack action back into the mix do, though? In virtually every scenario (except for post-level 15 for full-BAB classes) just using three simple actions yields the same result.

Is there some concern, maybe, about how actions with the "during a full-attack" qualifier function?

And let me be honest right now, this is one of my favorite new rules in Unchained. I believe it streamlines the combat system, is more flexible, and isn't as overtly breakable.


Azih wrote:
DMU: I was listening to the Know Direction podcast that recorded the Paizocon session on Unchained rules and the designers basically said that a lot of stuff in the revised action economy is left to the DM to handle as they didn't go through and fit all the years of old rules about swift actions, full attack actions etc. onto the three act per round revised system.

And doesn't it just show? I have to say, I'm not interested in stopping every fight to make a ruling on a new swift action that's just come up - I'm in this to have fun too, y'all!

Tirion Jörðhár wrote:

My thought would be to leave swift actions as swift actions. Use the 3-action system as it is, but also leave the swift actions as they are, 1 per round. This would not penalize those classes that use swift actions. If someone wishes to use a more than 1 swift action, then the second (third? fourth?) would take up actual action slots. For instance, this would enable a higher level bard to start a performance (swift), use Arcane Armor Training (swift in an action slot), and then cast a spell (2 actions) all in 1 round.

Thus, you would get 1 swift/immediate (if you use it as an Immediate, you lose it as a swift). And you also get your normal AoO (with extras from Combat Reflexes). Then, during your turn, you get the three actual actions.

THIS. Seriously, this. This is how it's going to work. Paizo, give this guy/gal a job, stat!

Azih wrote:
Unless I'm very wrong EVERYBODY loses the extra attacks from BAB in the revised action system and gains three actions which they can use to attack three times if they want.

You're not wrong. Or if you are, I need to check in for advanced reading comprehension, 'cause that's the way I understand it too.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
DM Unchained wrote:
Tirion Jörðhár wrote:

My thought would be to leave swift actions as swift actions. Use the 3-action system as it is, but also leave the swift actions as they are, 1 per round. This would not penalize those classes that use swift actions. If someone wishes to use a more than 1 swift action, then the second (third? fourth?) would take up actual action slots. For instance, this would enable a higher level bard to start a performance (swift), use Arcane Armor Training (swift in an action slot), and then cast a spell (2 actions) all in 1 round.

Thus, you would get 1 swift/immediate (if you use it as an Immediate, you lose it as a swift). And you also get your normal AoO (with extras from Combat Reflexes). Then, during your turn, you get the three actual actions.

THIS. Seriously, this. This is how it's going to work. Paizo, give this guy/gal a job, stat!

I concur. Good call, both of you.


Evelyn Gertruade deGrey wrote:
I like the new system because it is less limiting to low level characters (for example, it makes my necromancer-knight concept work really well) and prevents higher level characters from totally breaking the action economy. Plus, "standing around and full-attacking" isn't the default strategy of full BAB martials anymore. There are actually other, viable strategies one can take.

Agreed. There's a lot that the new action economy system does better than the old system, I think. Zahir's example above (start song, cast spell) is a neat example of this.

Tiroin wrote:
I think that what might be missing, and has been sort of referenced in several posts above, is that they seem to be missing a "Full Attack" option. It could be a 2 action complex action, sort of like spell casting. This would allow the high BAB characters, and Monks with their Flurry, to use their abilities, but would not result in the strange confusion of what happens when a fighter gets a third, or fourth, iterative attack.

Adding a full attack option that is two actions, but keeping everything else the same? Works for me!


We using Tirion's proposal, then? I wouldn't mind that.

@Evelyn: I've talked about my main gripes with the system here. Essentially, swift action users get nerfed because the opportunity costs rises considerably with the revised action economy: taking Arcane Strike as an example, why use Arcane Strike as a plus to damage when you can just attack again? Stamina does fixes that (I didn't know that AS stamina trick did that!), but usually you'll be using AS only when you can stay still and attack twice.
Speaking of which, 5ft. steps cost 1 act: battle are actually more static than before, as you'd have to forgo an attack to set a flank. Again, you're encouraged to stay still.

Though, I really, really like the base idea, too: with a lot of time, the system can be honed*, but I like Trion's bandaid for now.

*

*:
Personally, I would up the number of acts per round and make actions have a more varied cost: maybe giving classes different act progressions, or give classes acts that can only be used for certain actions (spell acts for casters, attack acts for martials, buff acts for various gish goodness etc.)
That would be both glorious, and take a huge amount of time to write. :P


Lol - figures the one who is against the system posts a bandaid that fixes a number of the issues that have been raised.

Goes and sticks head in the sand to avoid fixing anything else.


Quick, Tirion! Talk about the Monk's MADness! High Level wizards! Caster-Martial disparity! Fix Pathfinder!

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Azih wrote:
YanJieming wrote:
But then the monk loses all the extra attacks from bab.
Unless I'm very wrong EVERYBODY loses the extra attacks from BAB in the revised action system and gains three actions which they can use to attack three times if they want.

You're abolutely right. But that isn't a bug -- it's a feature. The revised action economy is freeing martials from the tyranny of making full attacks. :)

The way iterative attacks work in 3.x/Pathfinder is literally my least favorite part of the system. (Followed very closely by how TWF works.)

But don't mind me -- I'm still not sure if I'm going to be making a character yet. Should know tonight.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

You can fix the 5' step by making it a Swift action, of course then you get some AOO issues with 5' away and then a bunch of moves acts.


Is shoehorning the full attack action into the revised action system missing one of the major reasons to go to the revised action system in the first place then?


I'm not too broken-up over the loss of 5' steps personally, as I think things are more mobile over all. I also think that there is a lot more value put into Acrobatics because of it, especially the skill unlock that comes at 5 ranks.


Ok, so how would this sound.

1) You get 3 "actions" per round, as per the Unchained stuff.

2) You get one "swift/immediate" action, it must be used for a swift or immediate action. If used as an immediate (or swift) action, then you can use your normal action slots for other swift actions.

3) A "full-attack" is a complex action which requires 2-actions.
--> This gives a small bonus to those martials with high BAB/monks. When haste is cast, it gives an extra "action", which means that a full-attack could be done, and you would still have 2 "actions" remaining.
--> What this would accomplish is that a martial (or anyone) with 3 or more attacks would be able to make all those attacks in a 2-action complex action. For those who have not yet obtained 3 or more attacks (looking at you rogue(thugs) and bard(arcane duelists)), you could still make 3 attacks using the -5 per additional attack action of the Unchained system.
--> If you make a "full-attack", you can still make one additional attack with your third action, with an additional -5 on your attack roll from the largest penalty you suffered on your regular attacks. (We are talking -20 at 16 BAB.)

4) If you have used your swift action, you can still make an immediate action as part of a reaction in place of one of the reaction actions. If you used a swift action, then also using an immediate action would effectively reduce the number of reactions/AoO you could make by 1. You are limited to a single immediate action per round.

5) If you use all three of your actions on non-moves, you can still make a 5-foot step as a swift action. If you used all your actions and your swift action, too bad, you ran out of time to move.

I am sure that there is something else, but I think this sets forth what I think works, and seems to have the intention of the Unchained rules, without causing disruption to either high BAB classes or Swift dependent classes.


No. Too complicated. 5 ft step was OP anyway, in my view. It should take an action.

"Full attack" is GONE. It is no longer a concept, except for monsters.

The free swift/immediate action is the only fix required to make this work, in my view. Plus restoring AoOs.

Let's move on.


Wait, restoring AoOs? O.o
And you don't need to add anything for monsters: the "Full Attack" is still there, as the 3 act actions to attack with all of your NA, like the normal system.


Aren't 'reactions' supposed to be the way you get AOO?


Sounds fine by me. Although it does still leave the Flurry of Blows "action" hanging. Should we consider a FoB to be a 3-action "Full Attack", like for monsters, or a 2-action Complex Action? Or, do you make each attack and get a free full-BAB attack on the first attack (and second at 11th level)?

I plan on submitting an Unchained Monk, and am good either way. The issue is that FoB seems overpowered if you just get a free bull-BAB attack with a standard 1-action attack.

I have to take off, and will need to consider this more to determine if I have any other ideas.

Anyone else have any thoughts?

Unchained wrote:


The flurry of blows class feature works in a similar way. At 1st level, you can make an additional attack with a –2 penalty on your first attack simple action during a turn. At 8th level, you can make an additional attack on both your first and second attack simple actions during your turn. At 15th level, you can make an additional attack on each of your attack simple actions during your turn. You must, of course, take all the penalties associated with those attacks.

This seems to really simplify things, but enable the monk to get the high BAB attacks, and still save his moves and other stuff to replace the later low BAB attacks. Works for me, but does seem a little unbalanced.


What about leaving Unchained Flurry as a single attack action, but limiting it to once per round? It helps from it getting out of hand, but still retains its functionality (considerinf that now you can use it to FLYING KICK).


Personally I'd make the call that it just reverts to the Flurry of Blows described in the side-box on pg 103. Simple, and that seems to be the intention of the revised action economy, at least in my view.

Ki pool would still serve a purpose under this logic as, instead of spending the ki to get the extra attack, you can spend the point to ignore the penalty from using multiple attack actions. Not optimal, but it does something at least.

Liberty's Edge

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:

Well, the spells I would normally choose (Glitterdust and Haste being a great examples) are certainly nerfed, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to nerf my CHA though. I figure others have the combat thing handled, and Shaeda will wade in herself with 3 acts per round, but a Bard needs Charisma for other things. I need to look into this overclocking stuff and esoteric components.

On the plus side, the Lore Skill can be quite uber since it qualifies for the Bardic Knowledge benefits. I read Lore as telling me that Lore (Korvosa) is a bit broad, but I can maybe do it by districts. Maybe add them as we experience them.

I wouldn't say that the bard (or magus) version of haste is nerfed. for them it is a 3rd level spell that is learned at level 7, so it last 7 rounds when cast. Generally enough to last a combat.

Even the wizard version, with a 5 round duration, would last through most battles.
Glitterdust will last 4 rounds, a bit short, but useful.

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:

Bardic Knowledge is one I don't want to give up. That rules out a LOT of the Archetypes. Versatile Performance is also tough to give up.

I'm thinking Sound Striker, bring a bit of the Weirding Way to Korvosa.

I love the archivist bard but it exchange inspire courage with Naturalist, an attack and AC bonus instead of attack and damage bonus and only with a succesful Knowledge check, so it lose something of the bard buffing abilities.


I don't know, getting away from the screwy TWF Flurry of the standard monk is one of the highlights of the unchained monk. I'd rather have the extra flurry attacks (one from level 1 and two starting from level 11) stuck in with the first attack action (where hasted attacks would go) OR have it remove the penalties from the second attack (from level 1) and then the third attack (from level 11).


I think I'll go ahead and drop out. I haven't read enough about the revised system to know if I like it or not, and would rather stop now than get a spot in the game and end up stopping later.

Good luck, everyone.


Tyenar "Whisper" Checkeredpage wrote:
Wait, restoring AoOs? O.o
Azih wrote:
Aren't 'reactions' supposed to be the way you get AOO?

Yes - I'm getting rid of "reaction" and putting immediate actions with swift action, and so AoO needs to come back in. It works, so why fix it?

Tyenar "Whisper" Checkeredpage wrote:
And you don't need to add anything for monsters: the "Full Attack" is still there, as the 3 act actions to attack with all of your NA, like the normal system.

That was the point I'm making: full attack (for PCs) is GONE, because I don't need to bring it back: monsters still have it (or an equivalent).

Tirion Jörðhár wrote:
Sounds fine by me. Although it does still leave the Flurry of Blows "action" hanging.

True - I will re-read what everyone has said about FoB and make a decision tomorrow. Please therefore can we consider that discussion CLOSED. I'm grateful for everyone's input (no, really - I wouldn't have come up with the swift action fix on my own), but I think everyone has now had a chance to express a view, so rehashing it further is pointless.

So, what next? Back to actual character generation? :)


I'd love to, but I think I'm pretty much done...

Unless someone can point out anything I've mucked up (I've never played this AP before).


@DMU: Whoops, rolled two 1s on reading comprehension. <.<

And finding a character image is proving difficult, this time. D:

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Promise me that when all is said and done, you'll post whatever "decisions" are made regarding the implementation and changing of rules in the Campaign page!!

Liberty's Edge

Evelyn Gertruade deGrey wrote:

I actually want to keep the revised action economy. Of course, it seems the general consensus is strikingly against that.

I really don't see how people are getting that certain classes are being punished or not punished. I mean, even if you use a swift action you can still attack twice, attack and move, or cast a spell, etc.

I like the new system because it is less limiting to low level characters (for example, it makes my necromancer-knight concept work really well) and prevents higher level characters from totally breaking the action economy. Plus, "standing around and full-attacking" isn't the default strategy of full BAB martials anymore. There are actually other, viable strategies one can take.

Perhaps a compromise is to drop the Revised Action Economy rules and use the "Removing Iterative Attacks" rules?

Also, I saw that someone said earlier that they believed Arcane Strike to no longer be viable. I kind of wanted to get a little more discussion on that, as that is a feat that was fairly important to my build and I don't see how it's bad (especially with the new stamina rules).

There are classes for which it is very punishing. It completely remove the pseudo-haste benefit of spellstrike. With it costing 2 actions and the inability to move between casting and attacking it nerfes it even more.

It completely remove the usefulness of using spell combat + spellstrike.

That for me is the most striking example as it has turned a option on the way in which you deliver your touch spells with no action cost into a spellcasting action with attack. In practice it ha completely overwritten the spellstrike ability making it something totally different.

As it is one of the core mechanics of the magus it had remade the class into something different.

There are other classes for which that is true but that is a class with which I am familiar.

In the forum there are posts about the damage done with shocking grasp if you sacrifice a feat and one or 2 traits for that, but they are mostly tall tales. Unless a group normally play with the 15 minutes adventuring day you don't have the Arcane pool points to do that so often. When you get the resources to do it repeatedly the pure martial classes consistently deliver more DPS than the magus with shocking grasp, so I fail to see why it needed to be nerfed.

I suspect that the inquisitor will suffer from the same problem. Any class that benefited from using swift actions is penalized with this system when compared with classes that use standard actions, as now the cost of a swift action is the same of most standard or move actions.

Another big change is the 5' step = an action.

Liberty's Edge

Fighting Chicken wrote:
Evelyn Gertruade deGrey wrote:
I like the new system because it is less limiting to low level characters (for example, it makes my necromancer-knight concept work really well) and prevents higher level characters from totally breaking the action economy. Plus, "standing around and full-attacking" isn't the default strategy of full BAB martials anymore. There are actually other, viable strategies one can take.

Agreed. There's a lot that the new action economy system does better than the old system, I think. Zahir's example above (start song, cast spell) is a neat example of this.

Tiroin wrote:
I think that what might be missing, and has been sort of referenced in several posts above, is that they seem to be missing a "Full Attack" option. It could be a 2 action complex action, sort of like spell casting. This would allow the high BAB characters, and Monks with their Flurry, to use their abilities, but would not result in the strange confusion of what happens when a fighter gets a third, or fourth, iterative attack.
Adding a full attack option that is two actions, but keeping everything else the same? Works for me!

Under seventh level, yes, above? A wash from level 7 to 12, a negative from level 13 onward.


Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:
Promise me that when all is said and done, you'll post whatever "decisions" are made regarding the implementation and changing of rules in the Campaign page!!

Absolutely. I've been trying to do that as we go, but today's update has eluded me as yet.

EDIT - missed this completely!

Azten wrote:

I think I'll go ahead and drop out. I haven't read enough about the revised system to know if I like it or not, and would rather stop now than get a spot in the game and end up stopping later.

Good luck, everyone.

Sorry to see you go, thanks for your questions; I will be incorporating some of them into the rules.

Liberty's Edge

As suggested, the whole discussion about the revised action economy would merit its own thread, possibly in the rule forum or general discussion.

I am willing to try as it seem a nice buff for low level martials and some high mobility build, but I wouldn't be troubled if we dropped it.


Alright I think my crunch is done. Thanks for the consideration.

I added the Combat Stamina feat. So this character would be testing combat tricks as well. Should be fun to have ki points, a stamina pool, style strikes, and rage all rolled up in one very very martial character :). I think Lorick should have a lot of options to play with eventually.

Lorick Dreck crunch:

Male Human Monk VMC Barbarian
NG medium humanoid
Init +3 (1 dex + 2 trait)
Perception + 6 (2 wis + 1 rank + 3 class)

STR 16
DEX 12
CON 16
INT 10
WIS 14
CHA 8

DEFENSE:
AC 14 (10 + 1 dex + 1 dodge + 2 wisdom )
T 14
FF 17 (14 - 1 -1 -2 )
hp 14( 10 + 3 (con) + 1 (class bonus))
Fort 5 (2 base + 3 con)
Ref 4 (2 base + 1 dex)
Will 4 (2 wis + 2 feat)
CMD 17 (10 + 3 Str + 1 BAB + 1 Dex +2 wis)

OFFENSE:
Speed 30 ft
Melee Unarmed 4 (3 str + 1 BAB) (1d6+3/x2)
Space 5 Reach 5
BAB 1
CMB 4 (3 STR +1 BAB)

TRAITS:

Tortured - Unhappy Childhood +1 Reflex
Reactionary +2 Init

FEATS:
Class: Stunning Fist, Improved Unarmed Strike
Human: Iron Will
First: Combat Stamina
Monk 1: Dodge

SKILLS:

Acrobatics +5, Appraise +0, Bluff -1, Climb +7, Craft: Carpentry +4, Diplomacy -1, Disguise -1, Escape Artist +5, Fly +1, Heal+2, Intimidate -1, Lore:Criminals of Korosova +4, Perception +6, Ride +1, Sense Motive +6,Stealth +1, Survival +2, Swim +3

GEAR:

Monk's kit, Monk's outfit, Acid Flask,
12 GP

Special Abilities:

Human: Bonus Feat, Extra skill point per Level
AC Bonus: + WIS to AC and CMD
Flurry: One attack at highest bonus

Stamina Pool 4 points (1 BAB + 3 CON)


Here's fighting Chicken's submission, Juliet D'Artangen, opera singer, duelist, and burgeoning Wobblie. I ended up scrapping the caster path and went back to martial - swashbuckler VMC cavalier.

I'll be testing: VMC, stamina and combat tricks, expanded skills (expanded perform), scaling magic items, background skills, revised action economy, and automatic bonus progression.

I've included everything from Juliet's profile here for easy perusal. Thanks for the consideration!

crunch:
human half-Varisan female swashbuckler 1 (inspired blade) VMC Order of the Flame cavalier
CN medium human
Init +4; Senses Perception +5
-------------
Defense
-------------

AC 17, Touch 14, Flat footed 13, (10 +3 armor +4 dex)
Hp 12
Fort +2, Ref +6, Will +1
-------------
Offense
-------------
Spd 30 ft
Melee +6 rapier (1d6+4/18-20x2)
Melee/Ranged +3/+5 dagger (1d4+4/19-20x2, Range 10')
SA Panache (3/day); stamina pool (3); Opportune Riposte

-------------
Stats
-------------
Str 10 Dex 18 Con 14 Int 13 Wis 10 Cha 14
BAB +1, CMB +1 CMD 15 FFCMD 11
Feats: combat stamina; fencing grace; weapon finesse (from Swashbuckler's Finesse); weapon focus [Rapier] (from Inspired Blade)
Traits: drug addict (+1 fortitude saves, Campaign trait); inspired (1/day roll twice and take better result on any skill or ability check); t
Drawbacks: vain
Skills: (9 - 4 Base, 1 human, 1 int, 1 favored class, 2 background): (1) Acrobatics +7; (1) Bluff +6; Climb -1; (1) Diplomacy +6; Escape Artist +3; (1) Intimidate +6; (1) Knowledge (local) +5; Linguistics +2; (1) Perception +5; (1) Perform (Act) +6; (1) Perform (Sing) +6; Ride +3; Sense Motive +1; Sleight of Hand +3; Stealth +4; (1) Swim +3
Languages Common, Varisian
SQ: Bonus Feat; Skilled; Favored Class (Swashbuckler); Inspired Finesse; Panache (5/day); Combat Stamina Pool (3); Deeds [Opportune Riposte; Derring-Do; Dodging Panache]; Cavalier Order (Order of the Flame)

-------------
Gear
-------------

dilettante's outfit (8#, includes bandolier weight), bandolier (2), studded leather armor (20#), swashbuckler's kit [backpack (2#), bedroll (5#), belt pouch (0.5#), iron pot (4#), mess kit (1#), torches (10, 1# ea.), trail rations (5; 1# ea.), waterskin (4#)], traveler's outfit (5#), dagger (1#), rapier named "Spite" (2#)

-------------
Carrying Capacity
-------------
Light load: 33# Medium Load: 33-66# Heavy Load: 67-100#

When in Korvosa, Juliette carries her armor, rapier, belt pouches, dagger, and dilettant's outfit. Everything else is at her apartment.

Total load: #31.5

-------------
GP, jems, jewelry
-------------

99 gp

------------------
Advancement
------------------

1. (c)Deeds (opportune riposte, derring-do, dodging panache), (c)order, (c)panache; (f)Combat Stamina, (f)Weapon Focus, (f)Weapon Finesse (rapier only) (f)fencing grace; (fc)skill
2. (c)charmed life 3/day; (fc)skill
3. (c)Deeds (Kip-up, Menacing Swordplay, Precise Strike, Swashbuckler Initiative), (c)Nimble, (c)Challenge; (fc)skill

-------------------
Wish List
-------------------

-------------
XP
-------------
0

duels and duets:
Juliet smiled and gave a quick bow to the assembled onlookers, paying no attention to the three noblemen, writhing in pain on the ground from multiple little scratches, thumps and stabs, courtesy of Juliet’s fencing blade.

The three separate duels and three subsequently beaten fools had taken a toll on Juliet’s disguise – her hair tumbled loose from the tight bun she had tied it in, curly auburn locks hanging from her hat; her masquerade mask hung askew, and one of her disguise’s horsehair muttonchops was gone to the gods know where.

Sure, Juliet had dressed as a young nobleman and snuck into the King’s masquerade ball. Sure, she had snogged several eligible young ladies, much to the chagrin of their suitors. Yes, she had soundly thumped three of those suitors in back-to-back-to-back duels, leaving the young men bloodied, and perhaps more importantly to those young men, shamed. Absolutely, Juliet realized that she had to get out of there quick, but she couldn't resist herself from one last insult to the assembled nobles, either.

Stepping forward, Juliet waved her fencing blade in the air, smiling as the crowd gasped and collectively stepped backwards. Pulling her blade in tight behind her, the young woman gave her best impersonation of a noble’s curtsy, and then, clearing her throat, the duelist offered the crowd an off-the-cuff verse in her lilting soprano voice.

Three suitors lie in the gutter,
Left alive by my good graces,
Bruised pride longer lasting than the
Bumps, bruises and cuts to their faces!

With another quick curtsy, Juliet was on her way. Noticing an impeccably dressed older man staring at her intently, and with little fear, Juliet tipped her head to the man and made her escape.

It didn’t take that man long to find Juliet. Two weeks later, he showed up at Juliet's fencing class, explaining that as a student of the sword in his younger days, it was easy enough to see when someone that had taken formal training. From there, it was just the matter of visiting every fencing school in the city. The old man – Albert Ricci was his name – was again impeccably dressed, and he carried himself with a surety and dignity that came with living among Korvosa’s upper classes. Albert was the owner of a prestigious opera house, and so, in a way, Juliet’s singing career began with that series of duels – an auspicious start that was a secret kept between herself and Albert.

background concepts:

1. Juliet is the bastard daughter of a consulate to Korvosa from Cheliax and a Varisan fortune-teller named Alma. You wouldn't know it from her name though - Juliet D'Artangen is a stage name. Juliet's real name is Nadezhda Dooriya. Her father's last name is Tansiel.

2. Juliet is a student of the art of dueling. She was given a rare gift from her father - his fencing blade (a rapier). Every great weapon needs a name, and Juliet has named her fencing blade Spite.

3. Juliet is an opera singer of some repute. Not by any means famous, in the last year or so Juliet has gained some notoriety as the headliner at a second-tier Opera House. She's a gifted singer and a competent actress.

4. Her mother died when the Juliet was twelve. One of her mother's last acts was to introduce Juliet to her father, Thaliel Tansiel, a wealthy consulate with exotic tastes who has sired many children, many of them bastards. Juliet's father brought the child into his home, much to the dismay of Juliet's stepmother, Aurelia Tansiel. In general, Juliet's relationship with her father runs hot and cold, while her relationship with her step-mother and most of her half-siblings runs from non-acknowledgment to hostility.

5. Juliet did not want for much in her new home. Afforded a good education with little supervision, the girl led a latchkey lifestyle, coming and going (and getting into trouble) as she pleased. Her father's money and reputation afforded her protection and the means to chase her interests - as such, Juliet is educated, somewhat self-absorbed, and a bit of a dilettante.

6. As she has been hanging out with artists, students and people from Korvosa's underground, Juliet has become a bit of a revolutionary - the sort that upper middle class folk become, at any rate. Recently, the treatment of Korvosa's Varisans has begun to gall the girl (despite her own slightly racist tendencies, and her self-loathing in regards to her own Varisan heritage), and she chafes under the opera house's strict contractual control of its performers. Recently, Juliet wrote a pamphlet that caused quite a stir within the city's community of the young, the hip, and the fringe. It was called Collectively We Stand, and the pamphlet urged the organization of Korvosa's working class, service class, tradesmen and artists, in order to better negotiate working conditions and living wages. Juliet penned the work under the pseudonym Justice.

Gaedren Lamm:

1. Juliet first met Gaedren Lamm through her brother, Tybalt (see People, below, for more on Tybalt). Before long, Juliet had begun selling drugs among her artist circle, and using them herself. First using stimulants to help her with her late nights, and depressants to help her sleep, with an occasional stimulant/stimulant cycle for days-long benders that would end in hard crashes. It was during one of these benders that Juliet wrote Collectively We Stand.

2. Tybalt, Juliet's brother, let slip that Juliet was the author of the pamphlet causing a stir in some circles of Korvosa, and that was all that Lamm needed to take advantage of the situation. Lamm gave Juliet an ultimatum - start organizing the artists of Korvosa, or else the authorities will know the real identity of Justice. Juliet doesn't know what Lamm plans to do with this organization of artists, and she worries that Lamm has something truly nefarious up his sleeve. I'd leave this up the GM, if chosen, to work out, but my thought was that Lamm would benefit from an organization of artists in a few ways - he'd have an organizational framework for drug distribution, access to a community that he doesn't have, and can demand "protection" money, offer thugs as strikers, and the like if civil disobedience breaks out. In the meantime, he's at least got Juliet under threat of prison to continue dealing drugs for him.

3. Soon after Gaedren's ultimatum, Juliet went on a bender and then got herself sober. She's taken to spending her early mornings walking Korvosa's alleys, trying to think her way out of the box Gaedren has put her in. The only decision she's come to is that Gaedren has to go. The sooner and more permanently, the better.

goals:

1. I want to be famous, whatever it takes. Both Juliet's lives – as a fencer and as a singer – have been built on the foundation of need: need to be respected and loved, or at least spoken of in awe.

2. I must get rid of Lamm to live my life, by whatever means necessary. As someone not used to being told no or constrained, the hold that Lamm has over Juliet is too much to bear.

3. I would like to see Juliet gain more compassion for the working class, the poor, and become something of an underground activist as the game goes on, similar to the 19th century French anarchists and collectivists that worked during the February Revolution in France. I would use Artistry to create political tracts and perhaps a downtime organization to distribute propaganda, agitate, and other related revolutionary activities.

4. I would also like Juliet to evolve into a less self-involved individual as the game goes on, going from CN to CG or even NG. The adoption of the religion of Milani is another possibility for growth.

people:

Juliet left her father’s Southgate house in a huff, a litany of disparaging remarks on muttered under her breath. ”Doddering, stuck-up, officious, judgmental-“

Stepping forward to kick a pile of rubbish in the street, the singer didn’t see the elf stepping off the sidewalk towards her, and they crashed into each other, a jarring collision reminiscent of a Shoanti stickball match. Scowling, sure that the elf was a “dancer” (a bag slasher), one hand went to check on her coin purse, and the other to Juliet’s fencing blade. Then the elf spoke, the word "sister" bringing a smirk to the young woman’s lips. ”Yeah, alright bub, best get yourself back to your Shiver dealer,” Juliet said, and kept walking. But the elf was persistent, and after following Juliet a few blocks, it was soon apparent that the man knew enough of her father to merit a more serious conversation.

1. Tybalt Tansiel – or Ty as Juliet would come to call him – could be her brother. And over the last year Ty has proved himself loyal and helpful – to Juliet at least. To others, Ty can come off as almost a Storval Wolf, all teeth and hunger, and Juliet's pretty sure her brother has buried a dagger in the back of some sucker at least once. As a drug dealer and addict in the employ of Lamm, Tybalt is also a constant agitation and source of worry for his sister, as he is not always in control of himself, and ultimately, Juliet can't be sure where the young elf's loyalties lie.

Strangely, despite the fact that Thaliel has never denied his lineage to Tybalt, there is the uncomfortable fact that Tybalt is a full-blooded elf - probably misguided or perhaps crazy, Ty may or may not be Thaliel's son, but regardless Juliet has seen stranger things; a book at the Korvosan Museum of Mystical and Medical Oddities that was bound in dwarven skin and had tattoos that dripped blood; a Shiver addict in a dockside flophouse that turned into a rat during a case of the sweats; and blue-feathered hippogriff that in the hands of his Sable Company rider could turn somersaults in the air, belching smoke as the creature did so, like a choking dragon. Which is to say, that Juliet doesn't sweat whether her brother is in fact her brother.

2. Thaliel Tansiel - Juliet's father, Thaliel has a warm and cool relationship with his daughter. In reality, Juliet reminds the elder Tansiel of himself when he was younger, and he appreciates her wit, resourcefulness, and even stubbornness. However, he is very careful to show Juliet much appreciation, lest he appear to showing favorites (especially to a bastard!). He did however gift his daughter with his fencing blade, a weapon he was quite fond of in his younger days, much to the chagrin of his other children.

3. Albert Ricci - the owner of the opera house that employs Juliet, he's warm where Thaliel is cold, and has taken an interest in helping Juliet's career take flight. He doesn't know of Juliet's drug dealing or of her writings as Justice, and to find out either would break the man's heart.

personality, mannerisms and quirks:

Juliet's moral code and personal motivations revolve around the following:

1. Independence: I am a free spirit – no one tells me what to do. Juliet has always been a stubborn and independent person, and little has changed in this regard over the years.

2. Freedom: The structures of the monarchy should not be used to oppress the people. This burgeoning consciousness led to Juliet's writing of Collectively We Stand. Well, Ok it was mostly the drugs, but the point stands - Juliet is beginning to grasp that life should be better for a lot of people in Korvosa, and is increasingly appalled at the lack of rights that the working class and Varisans have in Korvosa.

3. Fame: I want to be famous, whatever it takes. Both her lives – as a fencer and as a singer – have been built on the foundation of need: need to be respected and loved, or at least spoken of in awe. Likewise, no risk is too great for Juliet, if the reward is large enough.

4. Vanity: I’m convinced of the significance of my destiny, and blind to my shortcomings and the risk of failure. Hand in hand with her other flaw, Juliet more than anything else cannot see her own flaws. She doesn’t see any responsibility for her former drug addiction or the box that Lamm has her in. Instead, she blames those around her for her misfortune.

5. Debt: A gift creates obligations. Give them freely and accept them rarely. Juliet is careful with her words and deeds, being slow to offer a promise or an oath, or to accept the gifts of others. On the other hand, she is very magnanimous with her affections and money.

In general, Juliet has spent enough time around others to understand that it pays well to play well with others. Although she's independent-minded, she is also capable of teamwork, generosity and kindness, especially when it suits her to be so (which is most of the time, really in life). Attractive and charismatic, she's fully capable of charm and flattery, and comfortable in social situations.

Juliet loves tattoos, and is heavily tattooed - everywhere that a casual observer can't see them. The young woman is a self-loathing Varisian, and secretly believes many of the stereotypes about her mother's people are true. As such, she rarely admits her own Varisian heritage. She's flat-out racist against the Shoanti, considering them primitives and savages. Lastly, Juliet has an irrational, biting fear of cats, which is unfortunate, because the little buggers seem to love her.

appearance:
Juliet tends to dress in the manner of a proper Chelaxian - usually a nice shirt, leather breaches, and a respectable (not Varisian) amount of jewelry. Of lithe build, the young woman is not very strong, but she mitigates that with a slippery agility. Although she'll deny her Varisian ancestry to anyone she doesn't know (and many she does), Juliet very much looks like a typical example of her mother's people, with curly, dark hair, deep brown eyes, and olive skin. Luckily for her self-esteem, plenty of Korvosan Chelaxians (and "Chelaxians") also look Varisian, so the issue doesn't come up too much.


I think the addition of swift actions isn't bad, but I wanted to see how reactions would work. I honestly want to try out the new action economy exactly to see where it breaks down. Seeing the Magus abilities get a bit wacky is probably no surprise. Spellstrike/spellcombat specifically messed with action economy, so a change to how actions work would hit them hard.

I'm up for using as much as we can and letting the chips fall out.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:
kudos to fighting Chicken to be willing to chance a full caster with the Limited Magic rule.

I am now forced to print a retraction.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

So what's our timeframe for getting this barge moving?


Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:
Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan wrote:
kudos to fighting Chicken to be willing to chance a full caster with the Limited Magic rule.
I am now forced to print a retraction.

Limited magic and the 15 minute work day defeated me. *Hangs head in shame*


Tarondor wrote:
So what's our timeframe for getting this barge moving?

In the words of DM Unchained:

"I suspect that assimilating the new rules and putting crunch together will take a while, and that there will be a lot of questions. I'm therefore setting two deadlines: a first of Monday 22 June for submitting a concept (name, race, class(es), background!, which bit of Unchained your build will test), together with any questions. After that date, I'll set a further deadline for completing crunch."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

OK, this is the definitive (until the next one) interpretation/fix of the action economy and flurry of blows rules.

ACTION ECONOMY:

This will run as the Unchained version, with the following change:

*the first swift action in a turn is 'free'; further swift actions are permitted and will 'cost' one action each.

Note that this supercedes my previous comments on AoOs: reaction/immediate actions will run as written, replacing AoOs.

Thus, in any given turn, you receive

* 1 swift action
* 3 actions
* 1 reaction

FLURRY OF BLOWS (to my sanity):

These rules run in tandem with the revised action economy above.

Without using ki

At 1st level, a monk may attack as follows:

1st Action: attack (plus 1 flurry attack, no penalty to hit)
2nd Action: attack, -5 to hit
3rd Action: attack, -10 to hit

At 3rd level, a monk may attack as follows:

1st Action: attack (plus 1 flurry attack, no penalty to hit)
2nd Action: attack, -5 to hit
3rd Action: attack, -10 to hit

At 11th level, a monk may attack as follows:

1st Action: attack (plus 1 flurry attack, no penalty to hit)
2nd Action: attack, -5 to hit (plus 1 flurry attack, no penalty to hit)
3rd Action: attack, -10 to hit

Using ki

At 3rd level, a monk may attack as follows:

Swift Action: spend 1 ki point
1st Action: attack (plus 2 flurry attacks, no penalty to hit)
2nd Action: attack, -5 to hit
3rd Action: attack, -10 to hit

At 11th level, a monk may attack as follows:

Swift Action: spend 1 ki point
1st Action: attack (plus 2 flurry attacks, no penalty to hit)
2nd Action: attack, -5 to hit (plus 1 flurry attack, no penalty to hit)
3rd Action: attack, -10 to hit

In effect, the ki point buys you one extra attack on the first flurry - so, under these rules, you can spend a ki point (swift action), flurry to get in 3 attacks (one action) and still have two actions remaining to do other things.

Azih wrote:
I'd rather have the extra flurry attacks (one from level 1 and two starting from level 11) stuck in with the first attack action (where hasted attacks would go) OR have it remove the penalties from the second attack (from level 1) and then the third attack (from level 11)

I think getting ALL the flurry attacks in your first action goes against RAI: the flurry of blows is a full-round action in "chained" Pathfinder - and although the full-round attack as such is gone, putting the entire flurry into a single action leaves you two other actions for the turn, which strikes me as a bit overpowered.

I also can't find anything in RAW that suggests that the flurry removes the penalties from the second and third attacks: it looks like you get the flurry attacks without penalty, but that's it. I think that is still pretty generous: at 11th level you can spend 2 actions and a swift action to get 5 attacks, of which 4 (first attack, all three flurry attacks) have no penalty - and you still have one action left to move or make one more attack (albeit with a -10 penalty). I think that's pretty damn good.

Enchanter Tim wrote:

I think the addition of swift actions isn't bad, but I wanted to see how reactions would work. I honestly want to try out the new action economy exactly to see where it breaks down. Seeing the Magus abilities get a bit wacky is probably no surprise. Spellstrike/spellcombat specifically messed with action economy, so a change to how actions work would hit them hard.

I'm up for using as much as we can and letting the chips fall out.

I sympathise with that, and I have ultimately decided to keep reactions in. But I think we have seen where the system breaks down, and it's with swift actions. It's all very well for the game designers to say "oh we'll leave it to the DM to handle" - but to be honest, if I have to make a decision on which swift action becomes a free action and which one doesn't (and what effects that will have on the game) every.single.time a new one comes up for discussion, MY chips will fall out... I'm in this to have fun, too, you know :-)

I haven't updated the Campaign tab yet, but I will do. Please disregard it for the moment.

Campaign tab is updated.

101 to 150 of 240 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Online Campaigns / Recruitment / CotCT unchained: recruitment is now open! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.