Matthew Gilman's page

So in a new campaign, we have a player at our table who is building a 6th level character with 5 levels in Brawler, and a 1 level dip in the Master of Many Styles monk archetype. He was interested in using the Unchained Monk as the base for the archetype - a move which we thought was perfectly legal in the RAW since the archetype doesn't replace any class features which the Unchained Monk does not have (although Flurry has been simplified). We have since found the bit in the Advanced Class Guide that explicitly says that the Unchained Monk is not allowed to be used with any previously published archetypes (unlike other Unchained classes).

From what we can tell, it's not an unreasonable house rule to allow the use of the MoMS with the UC Monk in this build. If the character were to be strictly progressing as a MoMS, the offensive bonuses of the UC Monk might be too much to allow. As it stands, the player is only taking a 1 level dip at 3rd level (in order to take Dragon Style as the 3rd level feat and Dragon Ferocity as the MoMS bonus feat), and the only trade-off is that the character will have significantly weaker saves, and would keep the BaB progression that they would otherwise have as a 6th level Brawler. The BaB progression of the character is obviously important since the character will qualify for more combat feats at lower levels (especially relevant because of Martial Flexibility). While that's a lot more attractive than being at a slightly lower BaB and significantly higher saves, it doesn't seem broken or unreasonable to us.

TL;DR - The RAW are against mixing MoMS and UC Monk, but as a 1 lvl dip in a Brawler build it seems reasonable. Is there any compelling reason why it's broken/ought not be allowed?

I'm working on a Brawler build, and for several reasons, I'm taking a 1 level dip into the Master of Many Styles Monk Archetype. I've got it all figured out except where the AC bonus and Unarmed Damage are concerned. The AC bonus of the Brawler and Monk are identical, save for the fact that the Monk also adds her Wisdom to her AC, and the Brawler may still wear light armor. The class features have the same name, and are both modified in the same way by a Monk's Robe wondrous item. It's the same story with the Unarmed Damage.

My question is this: would the AC bonus from each class "stack" as separate class features with the same name, or is it reasonable to combine them like sneak attack damage from levels of both rogue and ninja? What would "stacking" the unarmed damage from 4 levels of Brawler and 4 levels of Monk even look like?

It seems that if you wanted your monk levels to count toward the AC bonus total (and retain your wisdom bonus to AC), you would have to refrain from wearing armor in spite of also being a brawler. With unarmed damage it especially seems like monk levels ought to be treated as brawler levels (and vice versa) for the purposes of advancing this ability. In other words a Character with 4 Brawler and 4 Monk levels seems like it should have an unarmed damage of 1d10 instead of 1d8 (or *shudder* 2d8). I'd also think that a character that has 3 Brawler and 1 Monk level ought to be at a +1 AC bonus.

It's definitely not in the RAW, but seeing as this is a new class I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that this is what the RAI might look like. If anyone has anything from Paizo staff on this issue, I'd deeply appreciate it.

Upon further review, I see no reason why the Snake Style feats should not be an option for this archetype. It's a way of still using a lot of the features built into the archetype but in a decidedly more offensive way. Options > rails.

Consider it done.

My apologies, it is called Quivering Palm. Monk class ability, level 15. It is essentially a death attack with an at-will trigger switch instead of instant death.

Gotcha. Thought maybe there was a modified version of it from an archetype or something.

Depends on your order. At a glance the samurai and cavalier are not, but once you look into the orders charisma is their mental statistic of choice. Though there is one that is based off wisdom/intelligence. Its optional, but you might consider it.

Welp, the default order of the WS is Ronin, which doesn't rely on charisma. Their other abilities somewhat rely on wisdom. Having the ability to change your order abilities gives you the option to emulate the abilities of an ally if it seems worthwhile. If you're going with this archetype, wis > cha.

Yes, actually I'm pretty sure I have. The cold stare of those snake eyes. Intimidate isn't just yelling 'Rawr!', is that's cold steely stare. That's one of the iconic parts of a showdown, that's part of the 3.5 and PF Iajutsu, be it that stare or that roaring Kiyap.

It always looked to me like he was staring someone down to size them up, but that might just be a difference of opinion. None of the Seven Samurai ever relied on intimidation/stare-downs. Although it's a common thing found in Samurai, it's just not a relevant feature of *this* archetype. A shaken opponent is more likely to fail an attack roll (making better use of Crane Riposte), but not necessary.

If you absolutely have to use crane style, you might consider adding a caveat that your allowed to use Crane Wing while wielding your weapon but not having to have a free hand. As written you lockdown the player into using the weapon, which means you can never actually benefit if your wielding a two handed weapon unless you have three hands.

It's totally in there: "He may only gain the benefits of these feats when he is wielding the weapon he selected for Weapon Expertise (although he need not have an empty hand as described in Deflect Arrows or Crane Wing so long as he is only wielding his selected weapon)."

... a nodachi is effectively a two handed katana in game and a large katana irl, while a naginata is a polearm used for infantry if I remember right. I would think it wouldn't be a bad option at least.

Not really. It's not what the greatsword is to the longsword. The blade is about the same size (if not a little longer) with an extended handle. It's primarily used by militia against mounted foes. It's a slightly less nuanced weapon, and only really good for hacking.

The Naginata has it's own martial art associated with it (Naginatajutsu). More recently it has become a weapon and a style used primarily by women, but Samurai wielding a Naginata was a force to be reckoned with. It's like a more heavily curved Wakizashi blade on a pole that could not only be used for slashing, but hooking and tripping.

Honestly the Nodachi isn't a bad weapon, but the fighting styles associated with it are not nearly as sophisticated.

Revision

================
Wandering Sword

Wandering swords are often Samurai who have learned the way of the sword through an apprenticeship or small private school instead of a large training facility for rank-and-file soldiers. Rather than devoting themselves to the service and protection of a lord, state, or settlement, they travel across the land searching for a worthy cause according to their personal code of values - whether it is gold, glory, or vengeance.

The Wandering Sword is an archetype for the Samurai alternate class.

Armor and Shield proficiency

Wandering swords tend to travel light and walk a fine line between honed warrior and ascetic. They are not proficient with any armor or shields.

Flexible Allegiance (Ex)

This functions as the Samurai class ability Order except in the following ways: a Wandering Sword must select Ronin/Knight Errant as his order. Beginning at 4th level, if a Wandering Sword is working with another character with the Order class feature, he may expend one of his uses of the Challenge ability at the beginning of that day in order to gain the order abilities of his ally. This replaces the Wandering Sword's own order abilities, but he must abide by his Ronin edicts as well as the edicts of his ally's order. This change lasts until the Wandering Sword rests and regains the daily uses of his Challenge ability (at which time he may once again expend one use to change his abilities as long as he is still working on a common goal with his ally).

This ability modifies the Samurai's Order ability.

Weapon Expertise (Ex)

A Wandering Sword must select a melee weapon (the Katana, Naginata, or Wakizashi) for the bonuses of this class ability.
This modifies the Weapon Expertise Samurai class ability.

AC Bonus (Ex)

This ability functions the same way as the Monk class ability of the same name. Beginning at 10th level, a Wandering Sword becomes proficient with light armor, but the max dex penalty applies against this AC bonus as well as his dexterity bonus (the total of both bonuses added together).

Ability replaces the Samurai's Mount ability.

Exploit Weakness (Ex)

At 4th level, a Wandering Sword uses his keen senses to strike with precision as well as to avoid being touched by dangerous foes. This ability functions as the Martial Artist (Monk) archetype ability.
This replaces the Mounted Archer Samurai ability.

Advanced Swordplay (Ex)

at 5th level, whenever he gains a feat or bonus feat, a Wandering Sword may select the Deflect Arrows, Crane Style, Crane Wing, or Crane Riposte feat, even if he does not qualify for them (but he must slect Crane Style before Crane Wing, and Crane Wing before Crane Riposte). He may only gain the benefits of these feats when he is weilding the weapon he selected for Weapon Expertise (although he need not have an empty hand as described in Deflect Arrows or Crane Wing so long as he is only weilding his selected weapon).
This ability replaces the Banner class ability.

Fatal Mistake (Ex)

At 14th level, a Wandering Sword who successfully uses Exploit Weakness on an opponent to bypass their DR may ready an action to attack the next creature who makes a melee attack roll against him. This attack is resolved after the opponent's attack, but if the Wandering Sword's attack succeeds it is an automatic critical threat. This also applies to attacks of opportunity made with the Crane Riposte feat as long as the Wandering Sword made a successful Exploit Weakness attempt against that opponent on his last turn.

===============

Edits: 1) "Flexible Allegiance" must be used at the beginning of the day, and the WS is required to follow the edicts of that order. 2) "AC Bonus" is not lost when the WS violates his edicts. 3) "Advanced Swordplay" description cleaned up. 4) "Fatal Mistake" now provides an automatic critical threat on a successful attack rather than a vorpal strike. 5) Revised description for (hopefully) more accurate flavor.

The term you're looking for is Rurouni; as in Rurouni Kenshin.

Incorrect assumption. This assumes that the character in question DOES have a proper lineage (if that is indeed a necessary feature of samurai society in the campaign setting), but that their training was from a much smaller school or an apprenticeship under a master, rather than a large-scale training facility that serves a particular lord/state/empire. Think Katsushirō Okamoto instead of Kikuchiuo. The borderline ascetic quality is reflective of someone like Kyūzō. Although he's not poor, he doesn't travel with a lot of armor or gear.

There's a 3PP samurai archetype for the Kaidan setting of Japanese horrro (PFRPG) from Rite Publishing called the Nitojustsu Sensei (2 weapon master) designed to emulate both a Miyamoto Musashi and fit a primarily ronin based warrior. The nitojustsu sensei loses the Order class feature as part of the build. In Kaidan, if a samurai offers protection to a community (instead of a master), he can still maintain his honor, despite being ronin.

This is also going away from the core-concept here. The idea is to create an archetype that doesn't require a whole bunch of gear, and instead incorporates superior instincts to create a strong defense that flows seamlessly with a moderate offense.

I would recommend giving the Wandering Sword the Sword Saint's Iajutsu Strike ability in place of Mount, and give him the Monk AC Bonus (or the Duelist's Canny Defense ability, which would let you keep light armor, but with Wisdom if you'd like) in place of his armor proficiencies (dropping heavy and medium armor).

I actually made this archetype to stand in contrast with the Sword Saint. Wandering Sword is supposed to be a much more calm and defensive build than the Sword Saint.

I chose to model the AC bonus on the Monk's for a couple reasons. 1) I don't want it to have to scale up over time. The WS already has to wait for lvl 4 to use Exploit Weakness, so I want there to be a good reason to invest in a good wisdom score right at 1st level. 2) They would only get the ability to wear light armor at 10th level, which is a comparable scaling-up of this ability when compared to Iaijutsu Strike.

For Fatal Mistake, I would say that your next attack against the target should be an automatic critical threat. I understand where you are going with adding the Vorpal property, but it seems like an abstract way to go about it. You could also go the route of Exploding Palm from the Monk. I am assuming that Fatal Mistake replaces Greater Banner, and thus should be 14th level?

I absolutely meant to put this at 14th level. Fixed.

What is exploding palm? I'm having trouble finding it.

I think I like the idea of the automatic critical threat instead of a vorpal strike. That would make the ability a bit more stable/reliable, and it's also fairly on-par with deadly stroke in regards to difficulty of execution and payoff.

Flexible Allegiance looks iffy to me. Why do you have to expend a challenge? Would it be an awful thing if he could say, be an order of the cockatrice instead of a ronin? A ronin could have identical edicts to an order of the cockatrice for example.

*Could* being the operative term. Normally for a Samurai, switching between orders is a big deal. You can become a ronin at any time without penalty, but you usually have to accomplish something in the name of any other order before you can gain their order abilities (and in the mean-time you have none). The expense of a daily use of Challenge is meant to provide a somewhat adequate price to be paid to use this ability. They also do not gain this ability until they have more than one use of Challenge, so they will still have at least one use left after using Flexible Allegiance.

Weapon Expertise, why can't they use a bow? Is this just to lock them into a particular playstyle? Why is naginata still an option if so? Why not the Nodachi if you want him to be efficient in swords?

The idea is that the WS can use his melee weapon in an active form of defense (parries and the like) as well as to perform feats (deflect arrows, crane style) that would normally require the use of open hands. If you used a bow to deflect a melee attack from a great club, it would probably break (and that's not to mention how cumbersome it would be). From a metagame perspective, yes, this is designed to be a melee-focused archetype. The Naginata is an option while the Nodachi is not because it is not a weapon that the Samurai class may select with the Weapon Expertise class ability.

Its also weird that their AC is connected to their edicts. What about edicts has to do with your ability to fight? My edict is I don't eat meat, oh no, I have eaten meat! I have lost my ability to defend myself because protein is a grave sin! You might also consider giving them light armor to begin with instead of suddenly doing great with light armor.

Getting rid of the edicts thing seems sensible (leaving the challenge ability tied to them). The reason why they gain the ability to use armor later is because, as I stated, it is a reasonable scale-up with the Iaijutsu strike ability. Because this is a powered-up version of the Monk ability of the same name (letting you wear armor at all is kind've a big deal), it makes sense that they should have to wait to gain that ability.

The AC also makes the class pretty MAD, because you want wisdom to AC to survive, charisma for your challenge to make it useful at all, and you need those 3 physical stats every other martial wants still. You might consider making the class wholely based on wisdom? Maybe add wisdom to intimidate?

Challenge is not tied to charisma in any way. Intimidate is also not an essential Samurai ability, and is something that reflects a different "flavor" of samurai than this archetype. Think of Jin from Samurai Champloo. You ever see him try to intimidate someone? Like a Monk, to make an effective WS, you really only need good wis and str, good-to-moderate dex, and moderate con. These can even be balanced out differently in order to customize how you want to utilize the archetype, but I don't think it stretches the character too thin.

You don't need to swap out a banner to get additional bonus feats, you want to modify bonus feats themselves. You might consider giving them bonus feats at a different rate, maybe starting at 5th, to help if you want to get rid of banner. Additionally, why is only crane style available, and why must you take crane wing if that actually requires a free hand style, while crane riposte and crane style are the two that are highly defensive and don't require free hands. You might consider snake style since it doesn't require a free hand, but is heavy on a sense motive, a wisdom based skill. In the least, snake style and snake sidewind look pretty amazing for someone attempting to be a samurai, staring down their foe, parrying, and then striking down their foe.

The reason why Banner, to me, seems to be an adequate trade-off for the ability to choose these feats is that they usually require a significant investment in other feats to acquire, and/or a significant dip into the Monk class itself. This ability also allows you to use these feats with the WS's expertise weapon rather than an unarmed strike.

The reason I went with the Crane style path while not including Snake Style as an option is 3-fold. 1) Snake Style allows your unarmed strikes to deal piercing damage. While it's reasonable enough to allow you to make a piercing attack with a Katana, it's not exactly awesome. 2) The Snake style path is more designed for a class (monk) with a lower BAB progression than skill points. 3) It's more about getting out of the way of attacks with lithe movements rather than an active defense using one's melee abilities, like Crane style.

While it capitalizes on having a high defense, Crane style allows you to boost the AC you have, and then use that active defense to turn on the offense. All in all, Crane style makes more sense flavor-wise, and build-wise.

Wandering Sword

Wandering swords are often Samurai who have learned the way of the sword through an apprenticeship rather than from a larger organization. Rather than devoting themselves to the protection of a single state or settlement, they travel across the land searching for a worthy cause - whether it is gold, glory, or vengeance.

The Wandering Sword is an archetype for the Samurai alternate class.

Armor and Shield proficiency

Wandering swords tend to travel light and walk a fine line between honed warrior and ascetic. They are not proficient with any armor or shields.

Flexible Allegiance (Ex)

This functions as the Samurai class ability Order except in the following ways: a Wandering Sword must select Ronin/Knight Errant as his order. Beginning at 4th level, if a Wandering Sword is working with another character with the Order class feature towards a common goal (GM's discretion), he may expend one of his uses of the Challenge ability in order to gain the order abilities of their ally. This replaces the Wandering Sword's own order abilities. This change lasts until the Wandering Sword rests and regains the daily uses of his Challenge ability (at which time he may once again expend one use to change his abilities as long as he is still working on a common goal with his ally).

This ability modifies the Samurai's Order ability.

Weapon Expertise (Ex)

A Wandering Sword must select a melee weapon (the Katana, Naginata, or Wakizashi) for the bonuses of this class ability.
This modifies the Weapon Expertise Samurai class ability.

AC Bonus (Ex)

This ability functions the same way as the Monk class ability of the same name. A Wandering Sword also loses this AC bonus for 24 hours if he breaks one of his order's edicts, including those from an order which he is borrowing abilities from.

Beginning at 10th level, a Wandering Sword becomes proficient with light armor, but the max dex penalty applies against this AC bonus as well as his dexterity bonus (tthe total of both bonuses added together).
Ability replaces the Samurai's Mount ability.

Exploit Weakness (Ex)

At 4th level, a Wandering Sword uses his keen senses to strike with precision as well as to avoid being touched by dangerous foes. This ability functions as the Martial Artist (Monk) archetype ability.
This replaces the Mounted Archer Samurai ability.

Advanced Swordplay (Ex)

at 5th level, whenever he gains a feat or bonus feat, a Wandering Sword may select the Deflect Arrows, Crane Style, Crane Wing, or Crane Riposte feat, even if he does not qualify for them (but he must slect Crane Style before Crane Wing, and Crane Wing before Crane Riposte). He may only gain the benefits of these feats when he is weilding the weapon he selected for Weapon Expertise (although he need not have an empty hand as described in Deflect Arrows or Crane Wing so long as he is only weilding his selected weapon).
This ability replaces the Banner class ability.

Fatal Mistake (Ex)

At 15th level, a Wandering Sword who successfully uses Exploit Weakness on an opponent to bypass their DR may ready an action to attack the next creature who makes a melee attack roll against him. For the purposes of this attack, the Wandering Sword's weapon is treated as having the Vorpal magic weapon quality. This also applies to attacks of opportunity made with the Crane Riposte feat as long as the Wandering Sword made a successful Exploit Weakness attempt against that opponent on his last turn. If his weapon already has the Vorpal quality, he instead gains a +4 bonus to confirm the critical.

===============

So, interesting? Balanced? Easily broken? Unclear? What do you guys think?

My inspiration comes from 7 Samurai, Samurai Jack, Jin from Samurai Champloo, and a bit of real Kendo techniques.

Matthew Gilman wrote:

A) Why this isn't problematic as it stands

A) I can't cast fireball in real life, so the game shouldn't model real world physics.

We're not talking about real-world physics. We're talking about the physics of the narrative. The narrative's physics are in many ways similar to the physics of the real world (with the exception of the existence of magic) because they reflect a fantastical version of the world in which we live.

Matthew Gilman wrote:

B) Would you think something like the special rule I formulated is balanced/unbalanced/overcomplicated, and why

B)Overcomplicated and Unwanted/Unneeded.

I'd grant you that, but I'd like to see you back that claim up with some sort of reasoning. By whatever reasoning you are using one might argue that a charge is overcomplicated. After all, why not just move up and attack the person? If you're too far away, your character is properly trained in moving that far and attacking. Invest in the feat that gives you more move speed. Why do you need a +2 bonus on the hit, 2x move speed at the cost of -2 AC?. Why do we have to have an extra initiative action just for moving and striking? If it's the case that charge, as a rule, is deserving of its rule status because it already is one, then it's a wonder that these games ever get revised or amended at all. If it's the case that "Well, if I charged at you with a real weapon, I'd have a better chance to hit you but I'd be defending myself less" then we're using "real world physics" again, and according to you, we're not allowed to do that.

Quote:

Pathfinder is steeped in a tradition of storytelling games, not board games. The stories existed before the 5-foot grid ever came into play.

That's the opposite of true, though. Chainmail was a board game. D&D added the storytelling part later.

True, Gygax et al. developed Chainmail before D&D (and assumed you were equipped to already play Chainmail before you cracked the spine on your Dungeons and Dragons books), but what they set out to do with D&D was completely different from what they were doing with Chainmail.

I did get my facts and timeline mixed up, for which I truly apologize (I wasn't even around until 1988). Granted that, the release of the Greyhawk supplement allowed for the players to eschew the game pieces entirely, and it stayed as a legitimate way of playing the game even through the first revision to the second edition. I think that's evidence of the point I was (hamfistedly) trying to at least get at: Pathfinder seems to be based in the D&D tradition of storytelling more heavily than it is based in the Chainmail tradition of wargames (Warhammer might be a modern example of such a game). As such, the rules surrounding it ought to reflect what the people in the story might and might not be able to do instead of what pieces on a board might and might not be able to do.

Aside: I've totally used a sans-board-and-token approach to minor combats in Pathfinder. Not only is it more fun for the minor scuffles, but it's a lot faster.

Well, I'm not sure the purpose of this thread?

If you are not looking to understand how it would play out then it doesn't matter how you visualize it in your mind. If you and your DM would like to add some house rules or house interpretations, that is up to you guys.

I re-iterated my purpose. I wanted some input on how people think things ought to work, under the premise that this is problematic and fairly reality-breaking (understanding the game world is not an actual reality, but we treat it as one for game purposes).

Consider also one of the most popular house-rules in existence: In regards to multi-classing, someone can stack their saves quite rapidly to create a PC that can resist any spell or trap. In response to this, some GMs will say to treat any saves that start at +2 at first level as a +1 increase to their existing base save.

the reason being that even on a fast save progression, after first level, no save ever goes up by more than +1 at a time.

Consider the lvl 4 monk vs the lvl 1 monk (martial artist)/1 bard/2 antipaladin.

4 monk base saves = +4/+4/+4 vs 4 monstrosity = +5/+4+7

Under the house rule, that gets chopped down to a +4/+3+4. That's much more in line with what you'd expect for someone who is spreading their studies so broadly (especially considering that a monk has a fast progression on all saves, and something like a 4th level Bard is looking at a +1/+4/+4).

House rules - especially well-written ones - catch what the RAW sometimes miss. I'm willing to bet a great deal of the rules we take for granted today came from house rules hat became exceedingly popular.

So, apart from telling me the game rules, I'd like some feedback on:

A) Why this isn't problematic as it stands

B) Would you think something like the special rule I formulated is balanced/unbalanced/overcomplicated, and why

C) Would you consider a different solution

Then what are you doing in the Rules Forum ?

This is still a rules related question, but it is different in kind from "What do the rules say on this topic". I know what the rules say on this topic, it just seems to not make a whole lot of sense in describing what is happening.

Again, the worry is this: Brawny charges, and Brainy is looking for that axe coming at him. Brainy meets Brawny's attack mid swing, not aiming at Brawny himself, but at his weapon (which is what a disarm/sunder would be). How does Brawny get to stop mid-swing, take a free shot at Brainy, and then follow through his original swing?

Even if we want to follow Morgen's reasoning:

the Magus lacks the training to actually know how to properly disarm someone so that axe is going to slip down his weapon and might kill him before he even gets a chance to knock it away. She doesn't know all the tricks to doing a proper disarm safely.

What in that sequence of actions then justifies Brawny then getting to take a second swing utilizing the momentum of the charge? It's not that it's physically impossible, but what, by virtue of Brainy's attempt to knock Brawny's axe away, grants another attempt to hit Brainy? What you're describing there seems to be a charge closely followed by an unsuccessful disarm attempt.

It seems to me that the idea behind the AoO granted by a person's performing a disarm/trip/sunder is that under normal circumstances, a person targeting their opponent's weapon/feet in an attempt to fanegel them a certain way means they have to go through their opponent's defenses first - hence the AoO. It would seem that mid-attack (or mid-charge as it were), an opponent's weapon would be outside of their normal defenses, and disarms/sunders made at that time would thusly not require a person to go through said defenses and incur the AoO.

Furthermore, we can see how readied actions against charges in particular can have additional effects that have some reasonable appeal: for example, a readied attack with a weapon with the "brace" special quality deals double damage against someone who is charging. While this does not directly justify my case, it at least highlights the kind of special circumstances that can (or should) arise.

Woooah, hold on there. Your the one giving it a series of story event meanings and so forth. The game is just that, a game. It isn't attempting to be a life simulator. It is just a tool for facilitating something for you and your friends to enjoy playing. Five foot cubes roaming about with ability X and damage capability Y.

Now the game is certainly more equipped to handle or encourage sweeping narrative then say Monopoly, but at the end of the day its still a game.

Ask anyone I play Pathfinder with and they'd say you have it backwards. The story and the narrative are the primary objective, with the rules and such being a means to keep things fair. Without the rules, I could have a lazer swords that I pull out of my bellie button that can fly and eat babies because I said so. Beyond keeping things fair, the rules are aimed at preserving the narrative. Pathfinder is steeped in a tradition of storytelling games, not board games. The stories existed before the 5-foot grid ever came into play.

With other games (Warhammer comes to mind) the primary concern is what happens on the battle terrain, not any sort of background narrative. The same is true for card games and the like: the rules come first and you can tell a story about it, but such a narrative is completely secondary and optional.

After hashing this out a bit, a good house rule might go something like this:

Special Initiative Actions > Ready > Readying a Sunder or Disarm against a Melee Attack

As a standard action, you may ready a sunder or disarm maneuver against a creature attempting to attack you with a melee weapon. The trigger for this action must be a melee attack (not a combat maneuver) from a specific target, and the sunder or disarm maneuver must be against the weapon being used in the attack. When the readied action is triggered, the sunder or disarm attempt resolves immediately, and does not provoke an attack of opportunity. Whether or not the combat maneuver was successful, you incur a -2 penalty to AC until the start of your next turn. The targeted creature resumes their turn as usual, although if their weapon is destroyed or disarmed, their initial attack fails (though they can still take any other actions, or any other attacks granted by a full-attack with unarmed strikes or any other weapon they have equipped).

To me, it seems like a mechanic like this is not OP. It requires some strategy and a good deal of luck to be successful. If it is unsuccessful, you've just potentially opened yourself up to a world of hurt.

Why shouldn't Brawny get his AoO ? Be wary of making Readied Actions too powerful. See also threads like this one.

The example in that thread is actually outside of the readied action rules as it is. The person readied an attack, but not a five-foot step. After their attack, which was the readied action, the other person's turn resolves as usual. It also makes sense from a narrative perspective that it would happen that way. Using Brainy and Brawny again: Brainy readies himself for Brawny's attack, Brawny comes in to clobber Brainy, Brainy seizes his opportunity, but Brawny is already mid-swing. Even if Brainy's attack is successful, As long as Brawny is still standing, his attack lands almost immediately after Brainy's does, without giving Brainy ample time to take a quick step back.

Again, the balance goes something like this:

Positives:

* Avoid AoO from disarm or sunder maneuver
* Possibly pre-empt and attack and leave a foe in a compromising position

Negatives:

* Must declare the creature who is to be the target of said maneuver
* Creature must make a melee attack
* Failed disarm attempt by 10 or more still means dropping your own weapon
* -2 penalty to AC (roughly equivalent to the kind of lowering of defenses involved in a charge) to account for the focus needed to strike at the right moment without the proper training represented by the appropriate feat choices.

Given that, what are the community's thoughts on this as a house rule? Would you ever play by such an addendum? Why or why not?

"that's just how it would play out" seems to be a highly dissatisfactory answer in a game where we are describing a series of events in a story, not a sequence of logic problems. I'm not looking for a "that's what the rules say" answer because I am dissatisfied with what the rules say. I'm looking for an in-world justification for why it should work in a certain way. The rules should describe the way stuff in the game world happens. The game world should not describe the way the rules happen.

So I have a question involving how to resolve using certain combat maneuvers as readied action.

Let's say we have Brainy the Magus vs Brawny the Barbarian. Brainy sees Brawny within walking distance. He knows Brawny has it out for him, and he's all pumped up and ragey. A scuffle is imminent. Brainy is also all out of spells, and has few options. So, Brainy readies an action so that if Brawny attacks him he is going to instead try to disarm Brawny. Of course, Brawny does the sensible Barbarian thing and charges the heck out of Brainy's face.

My question is this: Brawny reaches Brainy and tries to cleave him in twain. That triggers Brainy's prepared action to instead swing his sword at Brawny's big ol' axe in an attempt to disarm him.

Brainy doesn't have improved disarm, so a disarm attempt (even a readied one) normally provokes an AoO. However, the action that triggered his disarm is an attack, meaning that he is trying to disarm Brawny while he is already attacking.

If Brawny DOES get an AoO (which is the strictest as-written interpretation of the rules), that means that what he's effectively doing is attacking, and since Brainy is trying to whack his weapon, he gets to use that weapon to whack Brainy BEFORE the attack he was initially trying to make. He is attacking before he's attacking, which is some messed-up quantum jibba-jabba. Furthermore, since Brainy's attack is readied against an attack, the attack of opportunity itself would seem to trigger the readied action, causing an infinite regress. Even if we want to say that the readied action happens before the attack of the charge, it still doesn't quite seem quite right that Brawny can take an Attack of Opportunity mid-charge (or run in, stop, make an oppotunistic attack, then finish the attack he was making to begin with).

Does it seem more fair to resolve such situations as Brawny getting two attacks on a charge (his normal one, and the AoO), or does it make sense that given the nature of the readied action and the triggering conditions that the AoO that would otherwise be there is ignored? Is there maybe a third option that would better fit the situation?

Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:

The amusing thing is, there's a bas-relief under Windsong Abbey dating back to Azlanti times that suggests that Aroden's birth, rise to godhood, death, and the end of prophecy itself were all in fact prophesied. (See Beyond the Doomsday Door.)

Really? Do you remember what room?

Nevermind. Found it.

The question still remains: was Aroden merely a pawn in the prophecy, or did he knowingly orchestrate his own demise (or perhaps just his disappearance or loss of divinity)?

The amusing thing is, there's a bas-relief under Windsong Abbey dating back to Azlanti times that suggests that Aroden's birth, rise to godhood, death, and the end of prophecy itself were all in fact prophesied. (See Beyond the Doomsday Door.)

Really? Do you remember what room?

What if Aroden DID usher in a new golden age for humanity?

What if he PURPOSEFULLY defied Pharasma's prophecy in order to free the world (and mankind) from fate?

What if he sacrificed himself and his godhood in order to give mankind that which they had never been given since the time they were ruled by the aboleths - the power to forge their own destiny?

Quandary wrote:

Back to the OP, PRPG Bardic Performance need not be Music or Singing - It can be Dance, Oratory, Comedy, etc... It just needs to fit within the 9 given categories for Performance, and be perceivable by your desired targets of the Bardic Performance. Countersong must be something that can be heard (so, probably Musical, though Comedy could count), and likewise Dirge of Doom... But unless the specific ability specifies, a non-Sonic Performance can definitely be used.

Alas, some of my opinions are extremely unpopular but I'd like to take this opportunity to say I absolutely adore the tactical niche of the bard. It's this performance stuff that irks me.

Comedy? Dance? These things seem even lamer than singing in battle.

I dance. You gain X buff.

I tell a joke. You gain Y buff.

I adore the archaeologist, I really do. When I first heard of pathfinder I thought to myself, "For the love of god I hope the bard either doesn't exist or has been stripped of this performance stuff." I certainly hope a non-performing bard appears soon after launch so I can allow the class in my clan.

I would like to point out that Spider-man tells jokes in the heat of battle, and it doesn't seem overly out of place. A good quip at the right time jacks up the morale of the party making the party more confident and motivated, thus the minor buffs.

I think this is something that came up in the wishlist thread. There's a concern that like in WoW, when someone begins moving stealthily, they pretty much go invisible. This is, of course, not such a big problem in PvE (after all, a semitransparent avatar merely represents that this character is being sneaky), however, the issue is quite different in PvP situations, and especially in a world where there are actual invisibility spells. Can sneaking out in the open and being "invisible" to other players be justified? Is there a way around this?

I think it's entirely possible to make a stealth system that is still reasonably effective, and makes invisibility spells still meaningful. It all revolves around using opposed stealth and perception skills/checks.

First things first: let's remember that in tabletop RPGs, there's a difference between character knowledge and player knowledge. If we apply this same principle to an online game, we might reasonably be able to see why an opposing player or mob who is clearly in the field of view displayed on the computer screen might be left "invisible". Just because it is actually there, since your in-game character is not aware of its presence, it is not visually represented to you. Then again, just because someone is moving stealthily in an open, well-lit area that your character is clearly looking at, does not mean they should still be "invisible". We need a means of reasonably determining character knowledge, and this is where perception comes in. Instead of merely being used for detecting and finding traps and trap mechanisms, a character's perception skill might be used to determine whether or not they can detect stealthed entities.

The other side of the coin is just how sneaky a character can be under different circumstances. Lighting should definitely play a major role, as well as cover, proximity, and distractions. But how do you manage all of these factors? I think the answer again lies in the tabletop game - circumstance bonuses and penalties. Pitch darkness might provide a healthy circumstance bonus to stealth checks, while bright light might provide such a harsh circumstance penalty that it makes it impossible to walk in front of someone without them noticing. Large commotions (such as nearby combat) would certainly make you more able to pass without being noticed.

Then that still leaves the question of how often perception should be rolled, and what bonuses should apply. I suggest the perception field of any character or creature be broken down as such: A 30 degree cone in front of the creature counts as its "center of attention" that always recieves a roll of 10 or above, every second. A wider 90 degree cone of visual perception makes visual perception rolls between 1 and 20 every six seconds (one round in tabletop). The creature is able to hear anything in a complete radius around themselves, but this roll is always between 1 and 20 as well, and is not affected by things like bright light, and is more harshly affected by noisy distractions.

What do you guys think?

Switching to other weapons would have a delay as you have to put the weapon back in it's spot and reach for the other one, unless you did the drop weapon (free action so it would speed up things) and hopefully pick it up later (thinking when playing the PnP version).

Reason you would see wizards/clerics with one setup as it's usually the wand/staff/1-handed mace since you needed one hand free to cast some spells unless you were using the item to cast it. They could use a shield but it had to be a buckler since any bigger constricted with the hand motions.

I think identifying what a spell was would be involved with perception, you especially needed to know what was being cast if you going to try and counter it.

Spellcraft skill imho

All I'm asking for is to be able to build the same character in Pathfinder Online that I can build in Pathfinder tabletop. I want feats. I want racial traits. I want class features. I want multiclassing. I want my lvl 1 fighter with 12 dex and full plate armor and a heavy steel shield to have an AC of 22. I want str and 1/2 applied to my two-hand weapon damage. I want to be able to intimidate the orc captain, as well as the shopkeeper who has been selling cursed goods to the unwary.It's easy to implement (I think), but will fundamentally shape the game experience.