AV1611's page

Twin Takedown is essentially just a savings on action economy to make up for the action required for Hunt Prey. With Twin Takedown, you take 1 action to attack twice, requiring a roll for each separate attack. Each one treats MAP normally so, using one action for Twin Takedown, with agile and utilizing Flurry against your prey the first attack is -0, the second is -2. At this point, depending on how many actions you have left, each subsequent attack will be at a -4.

Okay, that's clearer. Is Hunt Prey sticky, or does it have to be activated as the first action each turn?

AV1611 wrote:

John R. wrote:

Also, on a following round, if your Hunted Prey is still up, I believe you can utilize all 3 of your actions for another Twin Takedown and 2 strikes to make up to a total of 4 attacks. With the reduced MAP and agile weapons, this might actually be a worthwhile reason to go full attack which is otherwise not wise.

Correct me if I'm wrong: Action #1 = Twin Takedown, which includes 2 strikes. Do you make a separate attack roll for the second "half" of the Twin Takedown? Is the second "half" of a Twin Takedown taken at a -2 (with agile weapon)? After using Twin Takedown, you could use actions 2 and 3 for Flurry. Flurry strike #1 is at -2 (agile). Flurry strike #2 is at -4 (again, agile)??

Once an opponent has been marked by Hunt Prey, does the Ranger have to spend an action every turn to reapply Hunt Prey, or is it "sticky" until either the target is dead or the Ranger uses Hunt Prey on a different opponent?

Does Flurry only reduce MAP to -2, -4 against Hunted Prey? It would be the normal -4, -8 against an opponent not marked by Hunt Prey?

Your 2 normal strikes after Twin Takedown will be -4 with Flurry against Hunted Prey w/ agile weapon. -8 against any non-prey opponent (though you wouldn't be able to use Twin Takedown against them anyway until they become your prey). A -4 for third attack (and possible fourth) is great since even standard martials (w/o feats accounted for) take their second attack with a -5.

So, is Twin Takedown strike 1 and 2 made with just one attack roll at no attack roll penalty?

Also, on a following round, if your Hunted Prey is still up, I believe you can utilize all 3 of your actions for another Twin Takedown and 2 strikes to make up to a total of 4 attacks. With the reduced MAP and agile weapons, this might actually be a worthwhile reason to go full attack which is otherwise not wise.

Correct me if I'm wrong: Action #1 = Twin Takedown, which includes 2 strikes. Do you make a separate attack roll for the second "half" of the Twin Takedown? Is the second "half" of a Twin Takedown taken at a -2 (with agile weapon)? After using Twin Takedown, you could use actions 2 and 3 for Flurry. Flurry strike #1 is at -2 (agile). Flurry strike #2 is at -4 (again, agile)??

Once an opponent has been marked by Hunt Prey, does the Ranger have to spend an action every turn to reapply Hunt Prey, or is it "sticky" until either the target is dead or the Ranger uses Hunt Prey on a different opponent?

Does Flurry only reduce MAP to -2, -4 against Hunted Prey? It would be the normal -4, -8 against an opponent not marked by Hunt Prey?

Also, on a following round, if your Hunted Prey is still up, I believe you can utilize all 3 of your actions for another Twin Takedown and 2 strikes to make up to a total of 4 attacks. With the reduced MAP and agile weapons, this might actually be a worthwhile reason to go full attack which is otherwise not wise.

Yeah, I'm using a Kukri for trip and a Main-Gauche for a +1 bonus to parry in the future.

All:

I am creating a level 1 dual class Druid/Ranger. I'm building a dual-wield melee Ranger. So, I chose Flurry for my Hunter's Edge. How does Flurry work if I take Twin Takedown as a Feat?

Thanks in advance...

I started playing Basic D&D back in 1986, graduated to AD&D 1E in 1987, moved to AD&D 2E as soon as it came out, then in 1990 I discovered the awesomeness that is Rolemaster. However, finding people interested in trying Rolemaster is pretty tough. So, I've gone back to using AD&D 3.5E, Pathfinder and, most recently, D&D 5E, to get my roleplaying fix.

I finally downloaded the playtest of the Pathfinder Player's Guide yesterday. I spent a few hours flipping through the book back and forth to create a 1st level human fighter. Some things I like. Other things, like skills, I didn't. I found the whole skill progression totally weak and in some areas, total nonsense.

So, a 10th level character with legendary skill in something gets his character level, +6, plus the applicable stat bonus for that skill. Let's say we're talking about crafting. At level 10, that character's skill in crafting, if he has an 18 stat in the related ability, would be 10 + 4 + 6 for a total of +20. While a 20th level character with only "expert" level in crafting has a 20 + 4 + 2 for a total of 26 in crafting? Really? I think that automatically adding a character's level into figuring the skill, as the rules are currently written, is just plain unrealistic.

Just off the top of my head I can think of better ways to figure skills. First, why not require Expert level in a particular skill to count ANY character level at all into the total skill? My thought is: at Expert skill level, a character gets 1/3 of his character level rounded down as a bonus to his total skill. At Master skill level, a character gets 1/2 of his character level rounded down. At Legendary skill level, a character gets to add his full character level to his skill total.

Second, require a certain character level to attain a certain skill level. Trained and Expert can be had by a 1st level character. Master level requires a 5th level character. Legendary requires a 10th level character. But you might ask, "What about the little old man who has never left his workshop his entire life? All he has done is work on his craft. Should he get 10 levels worth of hit points and attack bonus even though he has never exercised a day in his life and has only rudimentary skill with a club?" Of course not. There is a big difference between an NPC craftsman character and PC character classes who also have skills.

Third: I think there is too little differentiation between "Trained" in a skill and being "Legendary" at that skill. Four skill steps for a difference of only +6 with a d20 roll? Really? That's not even remotely realistic. Why not make it like the apprenticeship rankings that exist in real life for electricians, plumbers, and carpenters?: Unskilled=-4, Neophyte=+1, Competent Apprentice=+2, Journeyman=+4, Master=+8 (there's a bigger jump from a Journeyman's skill at something to a Master's skill at it, as is the case in real life), Grand Master=+12 (again a big jump), Legendary=+20 (again there's a big jump.
Legendary status in a skill should be something that a tiny percentage of those who are working at that skill should ever accomplish.)

What about requiring a certain amount of time in the character's life to move above "Expert" level at a skill? I'm talking many years in the case of maxing out a skill at truly "legendary" ability at that skill.

Using a modified version of any of the above or some or all of these in conjunction would be much better than what is currently in the Playtest.