Do any of you think the pathfinder version of wounding is worth a +2?
|
I think so. The key, in my mind, is the stacking. A competent melee'er of mid-level should be hitting at least twice each round. Add to that any haste effects, and bleed can accumulate pretty quickly. If the bleed affect did not stack, I'd say +1 for sure.
It is insteresting that this enhancement allows the bleed effect from each wound to stack, but the rogue's talent, bleed, does not stack with itself, even though it would be from different wounds. Seems like an inconsistency in the stacking rules.
I think so. The key, in my mind, is the stacking. A competent melee'er of mid-level should be hitting at least twice each round. Add to that any haste effects, and bleed can accumulate pretty quickly. If the bleed affect did not stack, I'd say +1 for sure.
It is insteresting that this enhancement allows the bleed effect from each wound to stack, but the rogue's talent, bleed, does not stack with itself, even though it would be from different wounds. Seems like an inconsistency in the stacking rules.
I think they did it that way to control the effectiveness of each one. IIRC the bleed damage from the rogue is equal to the sneak attack dice(7d6=7 bleed). That would be brutal if it stacked.
I think they did it that way to control the effectiveness of each one. IIRC the bleed damage from the rogue is equal to the sneak attack dice(7d6=7 bleed). That would be brutal if it stacked.I think so. The key, in my mind, is the stacking. A competent melee'er of mid-level should be hitting at least twice each round. Add to that any haste effects, and bleed can accumulate pretty quickly. If the bleed affect did not stack, I'd say +1 for sure.
It is insteresting that this enhancement allows the bleed effect from each wound to stack, but the rogue's talent, bleed, does not stack with itself, even though it would be from different wounds. Seems like an inconsistency in the stacking rules.
Bummer is any regeration or Fast healing, or cure anuls it. Paladins for instance are "immune" to it. I don't like that rule, I think the guy should heal at least the bleeding amount or even better the HP he took that provoked the bleeding, that makes it way better and more useful.
Bummer is any regeration or Fast healing, or cure anuls it. Paladins for instance are "immune" to it. I don't like that rule, I think the guy should heal at least the bleeding amount or even better the HP he took that provoked the bleeding, that makes it way better and more useful.I think they did it that way to control the effectiveness of each one. IIRC the bleed damage from the rogue is equal to the sneak attack dice(7d6=7 bleed). That would be brutal if it stacked.I think so. The key, in my mind, is the stacking. A competent melee'er of mid-level should be hitting at least twice each round. Add to that any haste effects, and bleed can accumulate pretty quickly. If the bleed affect did not stack, I'd say +1 for sure.
It is insteresting that this enhancement allows the bleed effect from each wound to stack, but the rogue's talent, bleed, does not stack with itself, even though it would be from different wounds. Seems like an inconsistency in the stacking rules.
in my opinion that is more of an issue with the paladin, the paladin got more attention to effectiveness than flavor. The swift LoH is kinda cheesy, degraded into a sort of fast healing rather. It is also fairly useless to use against the party, since they typically can use healing bursts every round, yes I don't like that either.. but I guess that is in pathfinder to stay, healing is cheap for the party but the effects are quite alright against monsters in general.