With the Belier's Bite feat a in the Chelliax Empire of Devils Chronicles book a first level monk can do d4 bleed everytime it lands an unarmed strike?
This sounds like it's a little much, even combined with a monk's less than optimal ability to hit.
Or is it not that bad?
As far as I know bleed damage does not stack with itself, so every turn it would deal 1d4 damage, not bad but hardly broken.
It's mostly that it can be taken at 1st level. A rogue needs to be 7th AND land a sneak attack before it can do 4 bleed a round.
Bleed doesn't stack. The only thing I find disturbing about it is that if the enemy has no healing available, you can just hit them once and run for an automatic kill. But a rogue can do this at level 2, so I don't see much issue with it. In fact, if you can't take it at level 1 it's probably a bad idea: it's not too great once you hit mid-level enemies.
Edit: It's not 4 bleed. It's 2.5 on average, which is a level 4 rogue, on average. ;) And the amount hardly matters. Bleed is weak in general, only the auto-kill aspect of it matters at all, and that only at low levels. And the rogue is going to attack from ambush then run; "has to land a sneak attack" isn't an issue for the comparison.
Bleed doesn't stack. The only thing I find disturbing about it is that if the enemy has no healing available, you can just hit them once and run for an automatic kill. But a rogue can do this at level 2, so I don't see much issue with it. In fact, if you can't take it at level 1 it's probably a bad idea: it's not too great once you hit mid-level enemies.
A heal check could always be made. But yeah generally if you hit at low levels what you are hitting is generally dead.
What I might imagine at higher levels is that when faced with a large group of foes, a monk could put a bleed on several of them at in one full attack.
Is that other feat, the one that gradually increases the monks crit threat range also in the Cheliax book? That one looked mighty tasty too.
"Bleed effects do not stack with each other unless they deal different kinds of damage. When two or more bleed effects deal the same kind of damage, take the worse effect. In this case, ability drain is worse than ability damage."
(Core Rules PRPG, page 565)
You cannot flurry a critter and stack on two or more 1d4 hp bleeds - you give the critter one bleed at 1d4 hp per round that way. A rogue's bleeding strike sneak attack is probably worse than this at higher levels, say at 3d6 or higher.
However, this still makes monks very sexy beasts, simply because they can flurry a whole group of critters and make them all bleed, then quickly move away while the monk's buddies pepper them at range, lock them down with entangles and so forth.
|
What I might imagine at higher levels is that when faced with a large group of foes, a monk could put a bleed on several of them at in one full attack.
Is that other feat, the one that gradually increases the monks crit threat range also in the Cheliax book? That one looked mighty tasty too.
You're thinking Hamataltsu from the PFCS. I have a monk (7th level at this point) in my game that actually uses both feats. She can be a terror after 5 rounds, critting 16-20. The Bleed isn't to much of a problem. Most of what they've encountered was either near death before she she actually hit it (she has a bad habit of BAD rolls).
Since bleed effects don't stack (but you apply the worse effect), does that mean that you roll 1d4 for each successful attack (on the same monster) and take it into account if the roll is higher than the previous one?
Say, flurry a critter for 3 successful attacks. First bleeding damage is 2, second is 3, third is 1. "Only" 3 bleeding damage apply (at the beginning of the critter's next turn), right?
As a side note, what would a monk/rogue do if they hit? The bleeding damage shouldn't stack, but the two bleed effects come from the same attack, don't they? As I see the RAW, it is quite pointless to take this feat if you envision a build with several rogue levels and the Bleed trick (or to take the Bleed trick if you plan to take only a couple Rogue levels).
well for a rogue, your not going to be able to enhance his hands beyond mundane. so once something gains a dr/ your pretty much losing a lot of dmg by not just picking up a weapon instead of continuing to punch for that d4 bleed.
I was under the impression that you rolled each turn, rather than rolling when you hit. So a d4 bleed is a d4 each turn, instead of 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 each turn.Since bleed effects don't stack (but you apply the worse effect), does that mean that you roll 1d4 for each successful attack (on the same monster) and take it into account if the roll is higher than the previous one?
Say, flurry a critter for 3 successful attacks. First bleeding damage is 2, second is 3, third is 1. "Only" 3 bleeding damage apply (at the beginning of the critter's next turn), right?
This is my understanding as well. The 1d4 bleed damage would be rolled every time the creature took the damage.
It'd be rolled each time but once you rolled a 4, you wouldn't have to roll again (since that is the max).
Myself, if the PC tried the "bleed it and run away forever" trick he might get full xp once, but after that all he's learning is how to run away from a critter. This is D&D not WoW- kiting isn't a skill we want to reward.
-S