cheolkeong's page

I was curious when seeing the unarmed strikes being supported by Striking Spell and Slide Casting, and got excited to see unarmed strikes being supported by various feats, including the very first feat listed for the class. The feats specifically supporting unarmed strikes are as follows: Arcane Strike, Bespell Strikes, Energize Strikes, Runic Impression, Second Chance Strike, Supreme Spellstrike. Not to mention the specific inclusion within Magus Potency.

Isn't this odd? Even as late as level 20 they make sure to mention the option of an unarmed attack in your new feat, but you've got a difference of +4 on your weapon attacks compared to that, and you already are probably better off just trying to hit with a spell anyway. I get that unarmed strikes are a special thing for certain classes like monk or barbarian but if they include it so much anyway... why not have progression for unarmed strike proficiency? Even if Magi didn't get it baseline, shouldn't Arcane Fists allow you to scale your unarmed strikes with your other weapon proficiencies? Perhaps maybe tying it to a 4th level feat that specifically focuses on unarmed strikes?

If we can't get unarmed proficiency scaling from Arcane Fists, my proposal is the following Magi feat:

Brawler's Spell Strike | Feat 4
Prerequisites: Trained in Athletics
Requires: one free hand.
When using Striking Spell, you may Grapple, Shove, Trip, or Disarm instead of making a normal Strike. The spell discharges on a success. When a Magus class feature would increase your weapon proficiencies, your unarmed weapon proficiency increases as well.

So I am a bit confused by raise a tome. It is a flavorful ability and sounds cool but I have to ask, who is going to use it? It requires you to be holding a book. Slide casting specifies that your off hand is empty so unless you are going unarmed you can't use it ,and Sustaining steel is 2h style so both hands are already occupied. So you are left with shooting star specifically using thrown weapons as bows, and crossbows are 2h weapons as well. This seems a very niche and while flavorful not really useful.

So I don't personally think the problem is with Raise a Tome at all. I think the problem is only having PARTIAL support for unarmed attacks. Spell Strike and Slide Casting, as well as a handful of other feats, specifically make the case for using an unarmed strike, but the Magus doesn't ever get beyond Trained in unarmed strikes. An unarmed Magus could use Raise a Tome every single turn while sliding. I want to try and make it work anyway. Pray for me.

Quick question....since the hair is can not be attacked separately is attacking the hair considered attacking the witch? This line seems to assume that, I am thinking RAW

"The hair cannot be sundered or attacked as a separate creature."

Make sense? It seems like I should be able to cut your way out of the grapple with enough damage but since you cannot attack the hair separately I am assuming the damage goes to the witch?

Pretty sure it specifically mentions that any harm done to the hair doesn't harm the witch, it would just break off.

Even without the adding up everyone's bonuses, this feat is more useful than you seem to want to credit. Solo scouting means that you have to stay close enough to your part to negate most of the value of scouting, or risk being caught alone and unsupported if you are spotted. Having two or more scouts adds to survivability if spotted, but multiplies the chances of a low roll, so it increases the chance of actually being spotted. The feat reduces the chance of poor rolls rather than multiplying the chance, making team scouting valuable. Yes it means you need to invest both in the feat and the skill, but, assuming scouting is valuable to your playstyle, it is worth it for at least some of your group. If you are playing a lot of recon or insertion-opp type adventures, it is invaluable for everyone to have the feat and ranks in stealth.

For the hunter with a stealthy pet there really is no downside. If you are of the devil dinosaur mold, not so much.

100% agree with this. If only one person in the party is ultra sneaky, it creates super risky solo play. This makes it so a moderately sneaky pc, such as a witch with a cat familiar, can help out a rogue instead of just being a liability.

It's also worth noting that not all contributors to the teamwork feat need to be making a stealth check for the same thing, and can use it as long as there is at least a 1-way sight relationship. If the witch is down the dark hallway observing the rogue as she sneaks around a guard 70 feet away, they still both get to make the roll. The weaker sneaker doesn't have to jeopardize themselves in helping out because sometimes their stealth check is entirely unopposed.

morbon wrote:

So, does Escape Route work with the Solo Tactics ability or not, since it looks like my ally is the one gaining a benefit even though I am the one using the feat to make squares around me not threaten for them?

It seems like yes, you get the benefit - Solo Tactics conceptually gives your allies all of your teamwork feats, for purposes of your use of them. So, you have Escape Route - when you move, all your allies also "have" Escape Route, and since you are an ally of them moving with the feat, its protection from AoOs triggers.

I hope that wasn't too confusing.

There’s a debate on RAW specifically due to the wording of bonus vs benefit, and the fact that the wording of the feat makes it seem like the benefit is that you prevent AoO for your allies. I think it’s worthwhile to revisit what solo tactics is and why inquisitors have it. Inquisitors are lone wolves at heart, abandoning the comfort and security of their faith to spend their time behind enemy lines hunting down enemies of their faith. One large reason that an inquisitor would even be adventuring with a party of randos in the first place is that they act as camouflage for hiding their intense auras of divine zeal. Inquisitors are like religious Batman.

The nature of solo tactics is less about the inquisitor’s willingness to help his friends, and a lot more about the calculated way the inquisitor views a battle. They benefit from timely coordination by timing their attacks for when allies create an opening, whether or not their ally is smart enough to be part of the plan. They take advantage of their ally’s positioning to benefit from coordinated shot, even if their ally wasn’t in on the plan. Shielded caster is the inquisitor using their ally as a shield while they cast defensively.

In the majority of teamwork feat examples, the end result is that solo tactics makes use of an untrained ally. It’s about what the inquisitor can do with anyone, not what he can depend on people doing for him. The wording of escape route would make it seem like the inquisitor protects his allies, but it would seem much more likely that an inquisitor would use his allies as a means to escape. Selfishness seems to be a key theme to the design behind solo tactics.

Up to GM discretion, anything is possible. This interpretation should be chosen and locked down when you take the feat. If your inquisitor is more of a protective person that is willing to sacrifice themselves for their allies, maybe you flip the definition on its head? But as written, solo tactics is for a character that would prefer to work alone and travels with allies for the sole purpose of their usefulness. The technicalities of what the bonus is in this case are tricky, but generally I would lean towards what feels a bit more scummy. The inquisitor can take betrayal teamwork feats that are the epitome of what solo tactics is about. “Yea I included you in my damaging area spell, yea it terrified the enemy, and now that we’ve won you can have a healing potion. You’re welcome.”

I know that this is a question aimed at the rules as they are written to a T, but we shouldn’t neglect the most important rule.

“The rules in this book are here to help you breathe life into your characters and the world they explore. While they are designed to make your game easy and exciting, you might find that some of them do not suit the style of play that your gaming group enjoys. Remember that these rules are yours. You can change them to fit your needs.”

Both interpretations have solid arguments but as long as you are consistent about treating it like the PC is wielding a normal weapon and a light weapon, I don’t see the harm in that. What is really the difference between the PC sheathing a two hander to pull out normal/light and allowing them to do this? It’s a power increase to be sure, but it’s far more about theme.

Think about it. Your PC wants to use dex for one out of two of his attacks instead of strength. This means your PC has good dex and bad strength, or else we wouldn’t even be talking about this right now in the context of weapon finesse. This means your pc is probably never going to benefit much from the versatility of being able to do a two handed power attack instead of this. There are a couple other benefits like being able to gain tripping staff and tripping twirl, but if a PC is dumping that many feats into being able to fight with a quarterstaff, let them have it.

As far as double slice is concerned, it’s a non issue. Double slice allows you to use your whole str mod where you normally would use only half. Again, if they are doing this much work to attack with dex, their strength modifier isn’t super sexy.

Finally, it just works from a thematic standpoint. The first swing is brute force, and the second is a quick fancy flip of the quarterstaff. If the attacker is low str high dex as we’ve said, it makes sense that the initial hit is less of a threat than the skillful followup catching the enemy off guard. For attack rolls str is how fast and forceful the strike is, dex is how precise and skillful the attack is.

With how many feats it takes just to make this kind of work, I really don’t see the harm in allowing it. The quarterstaff user could just dial wield maces with BETTER result since both attacks would be light weapons. Your Low STR pc, who could probably be a lot more powerful by leaning into his main stats with his feats, just wants to use a quarterstaff to fit his fantasy. If it proves to be a problem then nerf it.

It very well may be the intent that the offhand is only penalized as light offhand for TWF. But with some consistency I don’t think this alternative interpretation would break the game.