Oh...that's a good point. Anything more that a 5 foot step is a move action preventing a full attack. Thank you.
Search Posts
This is probably a really easy one to answer, but I want to check the facts. I have an acrobatically able character who uses thrown weapons and has improved snap shot to threaten out to 15' with thrown weapons. SCENARIO: My character is fighting a medium sized opponent. I utilize 5 foot steps to cast without provoking but my enemy 5 foot steps on his turn to hit me. Can I use acrobatics to do more than a 5 foot step backwards without provoking attacks, keeping him within 15' of me (my threatened range) so that when he approaches to hit me he provokes attacks from me? I'm pretty sure this is allowed and works as described above but want to be sure.
I have a Tetori Monk gestalted with a Druid so I may still consider Powerful Shape.
Thank you Archeik, I wrote my last comment before seeing your latest.
Ok, I overlooked something. First of all, there is nothing in Pathfinder rules that state you cannot grapple something due to its size. However, the grab ability is limited to a size category. Tetori monk Graceful Grappler seemingly bypasses that and states that spending 2 ki to grab creatures larger than you is a class feature for that archetype. To summarize: Grapple any size creature, grab only up to your size. Tetori monk spends more ki to take that rule and crap all over it. Awesome ensues.
I later found out that it's impossible to grapple things two size categories larger than you so that last part is weird. I'd rather it beI think this was true in 3.x, it is not true of PFRPG. You can grapple any size creature afaik. Can you please link your source? I can't find that anywhere.
Yeah, it's worded weirdly but here's how I read it: You have the grab abilty. You can only use it by spending 1 ki to grab creatures your size or smaller, 2 ki for larger than you. I later found out that it's impossible to grapple things two size categories larger than you so that last part is weird. I'd rather it be: As long as you have one point of ki in your ki pool you have the grab ability for creatures your size or smaller. You can spend one ki to grab creatures larger than you.
I spoke with my DM outside of game-play and he seems to feel that spending ki to gain grab is part of the attack action I would use to grab someone/thing. Therefore it would not cost a swift action. Yay for happy endings!
Thank you Paladin of Baha-who? I will remember that for future reference.
Thank you Rudy2. I do have a fairly lenient DM. If there isn't a specific rule on something he generally allows it if it meets a certain "cool" factor. We shall see.
Hmmm, linking paizo rules page just takes you to the homepage. I'd try to link the d20pfsrd descriptions but I cannot go to their website on the computers here at work...
If it isn't listed in the description, is spending ki a non-action? Scenario: 8th level Tetori monk with greater grapple attacks a foe in range with an unarmed strike and spent ki to gain the grab ability to immediately perform a grapple check. He then uses his move action to pin the opponent. Can I then utilize stunning pin (2nd level tetori bonus feat) and use a swift action to perform a stunning fist? (For flavor, I also have Jawbreaker do do bleed damage with a stunning fist) If I've already utilized my swift action to gain the grab ability then I cannot initiate a stunning fist that same round. However, no where in the graceful grappler description does it state that spending ki to gain the grab ability was a swift action.
How about adding a thing where they can Flurry after movement if they move less than or equal to half their basespeed (before fast movement bonus), and then increase it to their full basespeed (still before fast movement bonus) at like level 11. I'm in W01fe's group and we have some interesting house rules that give free and collapsed feats. Another house rule we employ is that any character can get full attack if they move half their speed or less. Perhaps W01fe just considered this a given, or perhaps it didn't mean as much without FoB.
Thank you everyone for your input. I believe that my question has been answered, "Are they advanced classes awesome?" Yes. While not perfect, it's usually the flaws that make something fun and memorable. That adage may fail when applied to D&D, but it depends on the style and personality of the player. Thanks again.
I looked those up as I've never encountered one before. Damn. Looking at their supernatural abilities tho I have hope for not being turned to stone. Petrifying Gaze (Su) Turn to stone permanently, range 30 feet, Fortitude DC 16 negates. The save DC is Charisma-based. Being Charisma based puts this in my passable range, but I'd still use Charmed Life as there's a lot on the line. Four of those would destroy the party I'm currently in tho...
Very true, which is why we agree on the core of the issue rather than the "I can live with it" factor. No thoughts on Superior feint? Or has that one been talked to death elsewhere?
But again, that's why I can live with it. I still think they deserve a decent Fortitude.
Like I said on page one of this thread, I can live will low fort and will saves due to charmed life. Rynjin pointed out that this is an immediate action and I lose the ability to parry in the following turn. How is that exactly? If I need to make a fort save once because my opponent has hit me with a poisoned dagger then I use charmed life and succeed on the save. My turn; I hit the opponent well but he's still standing, I didn't spend a point on anything so to avoid the dagger again I can then parry his next attack as that's the point of SBs. I may even Riposte and end the battle there. As I can only parry when the opponent is attacking then I'm not losing anything by using charmed life beyond positioning. Either I parry or I use charmed life...or take the hit. That being said, I still think they deserve a decent Fortitude. Yes, but in the example I gave I was fighting an opponent with a dagger. As my character could take a dagger hit well I don't bother using a panache to parry. DM asks I roll a fortitude so I assume the dagger is poisoned. I don't want to be poisoned so I use charmed life. I pass. I take my turn and attack. They attack me and I use a panache to parry and a second panache to riposte. If its already to the point of my using charmed life then either the parry failed and I'm screwed, or I use charmed life as a "get out of jail free" card once the true danger is revealed. It's just being thrifty with resources.
Like I said on page one of this thread, I can live will low fort and will saves due to charmed life. Rynjin pointed out that this is an immediate action and I lose the ability to parry in the following turn. How is that exactly? If I need to make a fort save once because my opponent has hit me with a poisoned dagger then I use charmed life and succeed on the save. My turn; I hit the opponent well but he's still standing, I didn't spend a point on anything so to avoid the dagger again I can then parry his next attack as that's the point of SBs. I may even Riposte and end the battle there. As I can only parry when the opponent is attacking then I'm not losing anything by using charmed life beyond positioning. Either I parry or I use charmed life...or take the hit. That being said, I still think they deserve a decent Fortitude. Moving onto available deeds. WTF is up with Superior Feint? If I read this right, I do everything necessary to hit an opponent as part of my attack action. Instead of doing damage, I choose to instead end my turn and that opponent loses his DEX bonus to AC until the beginning of my next turn. It makes sense as a thing to do, but why on earth wouldn't I just pick up Greater Feint. It's better in every way as you need improved feint as a prereq which allows you to feint as a move action. Greater Feint can be done as a move action (with a bonus to the roll) and they still lose their DEX to AC for the above duration. Rather than a deed, I'd prefer Greater Feint as a bonus feat or something as it fits more with the flavor of SB as being super badass at feinting, but still doing damage and making the opponent "off balance" for his allies to get good hits. Especially the rogues. Did I read Superior Feint wrong? Although I called him out, I'd like to thank Rynjin for keeping this thread alive while I was AFK for the weekend.
I can live with the character having a bad Fortitude and Will because of the charmed life class feature. I think it starts at 2nd level that 3x/day you can, before your roll, declare a use of charmed life to add your charisma mod to anything you'd roll a save for. My charisma is 21 due to some pretty weird circumstances esoteric to our campaign; so I add 5 to any save I want, 3x/day. Charmed life levels to a maximum of 7x/day at its peak. That "saves" the class for me and still fits the thematic aspect that CraziFuzzy mentioned with a tip of the hat to Rynjin's comment as well.
Oh hey, it worked. Now I can go to bed. It's approaching 6am for me here.
second attempt without the period in front of the first url...
Thanks Rynjin, but I clearly suck at this. Yes Insain Dragoon, I am interested. I have an Ifrit swashbuckler so I could utilize blistering feint feat. That's literally the only reason I chose an Ifrit. I'm curious to see what they did.
[.url=<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TO48Cnl66w>]Thanks[/url]
Where can I get the updated version so I can see the changes made to my current build?
This is the only lemon quote that matters. Accept no substitutes. You definitely upped the bar there. Check out Power Thirst and the sequel on YouTube, that's where I got mine. I'd link it here but last time I tried linking HTML with href in these forums it failed utterly. I don't even know if I'm using those terms correctly so that could be an indicator...
Good points regarding the favored weapons. I always liked the quote, "When god gives you lemons, find a new god." Maybe it's time for an updated pantheon. The Warpriest may make that never happen though. Too bad. I thought the Skald would be a fun class, but that's mostly out of nostalgia. My very first character in the Pathfinder system was a gestalted bard/barbarian and that was amazing. The DM allowed me to use a totem spear that had holes along the length so that my fighting with the spear while raging could still count toward bardic performance not normally allowed during a rage. Fun times. I was torn between slayer and swashbuckler so I rolled for it. Slayer sounded badass and swashbuckler sounded fun. I rarely ever play a full caster so the others only piqued my interest for the stuff I'd never heard of before. That being said, I think I'll try an Arcanist next as the exploit ability intrigues me. The arcane reservoir is old hat as we've been using the spell points system since last year. I'm getting to the point in my gaming where wielding a sword and being one of the best on the melee field is becoming boring. Basically the same feats = basically the same character. Arcanist will break me of that mold and introduce me to something refreshing.
I have a 4th level Swashbuckler from the advanced classes play test that I began at level 1. So far I'm loving the build. The panache system is very nice, especially since I hit level 3 and unlocked deeds that don't require I use a point. (I've never played a Gunslinger so this was new to me.) My only complaint is about the saves. Its alternate classes are Gunslinger and Fighter, both of whom have good fort saves. What happened with that? I'm starting this thread to try and take apart the Advanced Class system and see what people really think of it. Other classes in the party I play in are Warpriest and Brawler. The guy playing the Brawler is having fun choosing feats for a particular fight and the Warpriest is an NPC the DM threw in so we wouldn't immediately die. Looking through it though, I'm liking that its sacred weapon raises damage die, but am confused as to why they didn't limit it to the deity's favored weapon. Thoughts?
If Mysterious Stranger's idea worked out then a severely rich individual could have an entire palace or other such place be built out of antimagic bricks or wands encased in supporting beams. Thus making the entire structure as mundane as my own house and safe in that world. I have created that exact thing in my current campaign I'm running and have basically created my own prestige class to allow for individuals to be able to cast within that field. Thus making the palace mages the only ones able to cast within the field. It's highly restrictive and most players wouldn't want to be that prestige class as you can ONLY cast within an antimagic field, but if I wrote it up and published it would there be any interest? I realize I'm probably polling a dead thread, but I'm interested in any feedback whatsoever.
Yeah, I completely forgot my character's magma mephit familiar could deliver touch spells... That saves me a feat. I guess I just started this thread to talk about how awesome it would be to fire heal spells.
Good idea, Pocsaclypse. With that feat I could just bypass the whole weapon wand firing heal spells and just heal my allies at range with
My DM did make that argument, Moospuh. I countered with the fact that my bow is an Endless Ammunition bow and uses its magic to create its own arrows. Using that same line, it shouldn't be too far of a stretch for cure spells to do the same...I hope. As we delve into the "physics of magic" I would like to point out that this would be really awesome.
I have a Bard gestalted with Wizard and have three levels of Arcane Archer Prestige class. I'm wondering if I can fire cure spells at my allies with my bow using weapon wand spell. All other threads I read about Weapon Wand spoke of melee weapons so my question hasn't been answered elsewhere. I know Cure Moderate is a touch spell but I'm hoping that the use of my bow would allow it at range within the system. Anyone want to tackle this? We play with fairly heavy house rules but my DM is new to Pathfinder so he would like an outside opinion before ruling.
Could you use this style feat line and use stunning fist as part of a monk's flurry of blows and make them shaken and then upon hitting them at least twice use your free action to make them frightened with boar ferocity? Each states in their description that you can't use that same source to cause a foe to be frightened, but what about using two different sources?
Old thread but have to add one. I've enjoyed reading these. Pants of Haste The ladies won't thank you. |