Ultimate Combat - Content requests


Product Discussion

101 to 140 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

My take on making ranged rogue's viable. It should maybe give a bonus to damage as well.

Aim (Combat)
You can spend some time to improve your accuracy.

Prerequisite: Dex 13.

Benefit: You can choose to spend a move action to gain a +1 bonus to your ranged attack rolls for 1 round. When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every +4 thereafter, the bonus to ranged attack rolls increases by +1. If you have the sneak attack class feature, its bonus damage applies just as if the target was flat-footed.


It STILL amuses me that everyone wants to constantly reinvent the monk because they're afraid someone will call them a 'weeaboo' for having a slightly mystical mostly-unarmed low-armor martial artist sort.

This is exacerbated now by the fact that so many of the things that people want in the form of weapon feats and tricks are highly reminiscent of FantasyCraft, which is by no means a bad thing; it just pokes the funny bone in strange ways that a system that separated out the martial artist and monk into martial and mystical components (as well as core and advanced classes) is being tapped for inspiration, wittingly or otherwise.

Granted, I like both, so it's not like such is a losing proposition.


I'd LOVE to see fighters be able to trade bravery for a Grit point system.

Then they could make a bunch of TOB style fighter only bonus feats, powered by grit.
That could 'fix' the fighter.
(I actually do believe they do plenty of damage on full attacks, but a few nice standard action strikes would be nice)

You could make fighters have access to all styles.
Monks could have access to just the Setting Sun style, using Ki to power it and swapping bonus feats for moves.
Rogues could get access to Shadow blade and Tiger claw only using rogue talents.
Paladins could trade spellcasting for Devoted Spirit.
Rangers could trade something for Tiger claw, Stone dragon (using combat style feats)
Cavaliers could have access to White Raven only (using bonus feats)

etc.

No full casters can take them.

(Not suggesting a copy but a similar take on 'weapon style moves')
We've tried this for a couple of one shots and it's nice.

Dark Archive

- A rule to allow weapon finesse to be applied to dual wields weapons to be used like in the kung fu movies, but not a monk-only option.

- Rules or options that encourage movement during combat
Example feat:
Measuring Up: For every 5 feet moved while adjacent to an opponent you are granted a 1d6 that can be added to AC against one attack, an attack roll, or a damage roll against that opponent.


Ellington wrote:

Copied from another thread, not my idea. I want this so bad. IT'S NOT TOO LATE TO FIX THE FIGHTER.

Martial Academy:

You have attended a war college or fighter school.
Prerequisites: This feat can be selected at first level if you are selecting fighter as your first class.

Benefit: Your fighter class has 4 + Int modifier skill ranks per level. Add 3 skills of your choice to the list of class skills. One of those skills must be a Knowledge skill.

Normal: A fighter has 2 + Int modifier skill ranks per level.

Special: You may select a specific martial academy if allowed by the GM. A fighter may select this feat as his first level bonus feat and can not be exchanged for a different feat.

I do like this idea. Maybe it could work as an archetype for the fighter class?


Eric Hinkle wrote:
Ellington wrote:

Copied from another thread, not my idea. I want this so bad. IT'S NOT TOO LATE TO FIX THE FIGHTER.

Martial Academy:

You have attended a war college or fighter school.
Prerequisites: This feat can be selected at first level if you are selecting fighter as your first class.

Benefit: Your fighter class has 4 + Int modifier skill ranks per level. Add 3 skills of your choice to the list of class skills. One of those skills must be a Knowledge skill.

Normal: A fighter has 2 + Int modifier skill ranks per level.

Special: You may select a specific martial academy if allowed by the GM. A fighter may select this feat as his first level bonus feat and can not be exchanged for a different feat.

I do like this idea. Maybe it could work as an archetype for the fighter class?

This is

1) awesome

2) works finely as a 1st level fighter only feat. for EVERY fighter.

3) is awesome for the imperial guard officers in my setting (wich are NOT cavaliers, since cavaliers have anoteher role in human society).


Darkholme wrote:


Archetype:
Cavalier: Light or No armor, lose the horse - Put the focus on the honour bound dueling gentleman.

My reading of the Samurai as precisely this. Sure, I don't like the flavor of the samurai (soooo cheesy), but I'd just rename the class and be done with it. They get the option of mounted archery, but I did not get the impression at all that they are meant to be mounted. They seem just as well off on the ground as they do on a horse.


More support for lightly armored melee combatants. I generally dislike playing a character wearing heavy armor. I like fast-moving, hard-to-hit concepts and it often doesn't fit my character concept when the best option for AC is Full Plate. I would like more (non-magical) options to boost their AC through things like dodge, parry, or insight bonuses.


a version of cleave that does not require power attack.

lets seee what else...

well at the moment that would do it


I wish to point out the brilliant suggestion of this poster about crossbows.

And I shamelessly re-plug my thoughts about Greataxe, Handaxe, Dwarven Waraxe, Longsword, Greatsword and Bastard Sword needing some love (third post of the thread).

Spoiler:

what about

- a modification for axes able to make them gain the blugeoning damage type

- a modification for axes able to make them cut in half the power attack malus (round up, as an example, -3 instead of -6, and -2 instead of -3)

- a modification for longsword and one handed bastard sword able to make them cut in half the malus from fighting defensively and combat expertise (round up as above)

- a modification for greataxe and greatsword to increase the damage for vital strike (count the weapon only as one size larger, or double the dice gained - is far less powerful than how it seems

- a modification for Bastard Sword, Longsword and Greatsword to make them deal piercing damage too

- a modification for longswords to make them gain a +4 on CMD vs disarm, and a +2 on maneuvers - a perfect fencing weapon.

- a modification on greatswords to make them usable with brace, increase the bonus of shield of swing and CE by 50%, like the Landsknecht Zweihander

Maybe allow max 2 modification per weapon. This could add an enormous RPG potential - think about the PCs tryng to find the weaponsmith able to apply these modifications...

And please, no feat taxes :(

Paizo re-introduced sidebars in UM (a great thing!). It could be a good idea suggest some optional rule through the same method, IMHO.

My proposal about the aforementioned weapons could be fullfilled simply with an optional rule of weapon modifications (valid only for those weapons - 18-20/x2 and x4 ones get enough love*), too.

The crossbow proposal (first link) is IMHO a great optional rule suggestion because makes the GM able to decide how important are crossbows in his/her setting. Introducing it as a feat would be a bad idea instead - yet another feat tax for the crossbow users.. bad.

*Said this, it would not be bad increase the DC of critical feats of x3 weapons by +2, and x4 ones by +4 IMHO - this is found IIRC in the Kirth's houserules and is IMHO a great idea.


Much of what I want is mentioned already, while I might not use a samurai or ninja in my games the idea of clear and concise firearms rules that are balanced with everything else is rather appealing. But as for my big stuff

1) As mentioned by others feat chains or archetype options for specific weapon types for extra advantages or things like that with certain styles (maybe even making the weapon style things universal instead of fighter only)

2) I may be the only one but I kind of miss the concept of tactical feats from 3.5 and would be somewhat interested in seeing them again, or at least seeing if they would work.

3) Maybe some rules for templating animal companions or class steeds as part of advancement (this is more a maybe)

4) Schools of combat and warfare that might give their students bonuses in certain situations and penalties in others, similar to the oath concept.

5) Maybe this would be the wrong place, but exotic materials for weapons and armor as well as modifications to same that are nonmagical would be of some interest.


This might be a bad idea but what about exotic armor we have exotic weapons i think it would be cool if we had exotic armor just my two cents.


Darkholme wrote:

Maybe this is the wrong section, but I want to discuss Ultimate Combat without discussing the playtest so much, and hopefully have the Dev's see it.

So far I've bought most of the pathfinder line, largely out of loyalty, and the faith that the books will have things I'll want to use and will have a use for.

Ultimate Combat looks like it may be the first book I opt out of. I may get it, but it's the first pathfinder book I've even been skeptical of.

Everyone's focusing on the playtest of the 3 classes currently available, but the types of archetypes I want to see (that would easily belong in Ultimate Combat) aren't the ones presented. While a cowboy, a ninja, and a samurai are cool, they aren't things I need in my games, and will see marginal amounts of use.

So I thought I'd mention what types of things I'll be looking for from Ultimate Combat, and the presence or absence of these things largely determines the worth of the book to me.

Archetype:
Cavalier: Light or No armor, lose the horse - Put the focus on the honour bound dueling gentleman.
Fighter: Some kind of Swashbuckler-esque archetype maybe. Think 3 musketeers.
Gunslinger: A weapon independent class based around Grit - for melee Grit characters.
Monk: A no-ki pool, no supernatural abilities monk - Give me an over-the-top Jackie Chan. Full BAB on Combat Maneuvers, and free combat maneuver feats would be awesome.
Monk: Elemental Monks - Fire, Water, Earth, Air - Think Avatar the last airbender type stuff.
Ranger: A 'free hand fighter' combat style.
Ranger: A Musket combat style.
Ranger: A dual pistol combat style.
Rogue: A firearm focused rogue archetype. - maybe a sniper type.

Feats/Abilities:
Some love for all the 'free hand fighter' type builds, and some ways to make Sword + Board more appealing as well.

Skills:
The DCs for various cinematic over the top type combat maneuvers. (But please...

+10 darkholme and i usually don't agree with you but home run x10 on those ideas


Darkholme wrote:

I want something along these lines

Fighter Archetype:
Unarmed Fighter
Lose: Martial Weapon Proficiency, Weapon Training 2, Weapon Training 4
Gain: Unarmed Strike - As a monk of 3/4 your level (Minimum 1).

Unarmored Fighter
Lose: Armor Training, Armor Mastery, Medium and Heavy Armor Proficiency, Tower Shield Proficiency
Gain: Good Reflex Save, Monk-like AC Progression (Int Based, works with shields (but not tower shields)).

Why should the unarmed fighter become a monk of 3/4 his level? I think he should lose everything you said but get a smaller unarmed damage boost like up to 2d6 at most. Also not taking a -4 to disarm attempts while unarmed because disarming someone is incredibly easy while unarmed.

For the Unarmored fighter, why not make it a slightly better AC progression, like up to +9?

Grand Lodge

Would love to see a staff fighter archtype, similar to the maguss' in UM so you can get a feel for a good old fashioned fighter who couldn't afford much or like most peasants did as it was the only means to practice with out having an actual weapon

Scarab Sages

I can only join the chorus: Please help make Dex-based melee characters viable!

I know Rogues exist, but they are horribly squishy. I know Rangers and Fighters can take Finesse, but they have an extremely hard time staying relevant in terms of damage output. I've heard about Dervish Dance, but it's extremely restrictive in terms of flavor as well as crunch.

What is needed is a mechanic to increase the damage output of Finesse combattants, with the following properties:
- Affordable cost. Something with harsh prerequisites like Spring Attack is going to cripple most builds, especially if they also want to pursue other feat trees matching the flavor (such as Spring Attack!).
- Limited power. A Dex-based fighter should have a lower raw damage output than a Str-based one. It makes sense conceptually, and it is needed because a high Dex comes with lots of other advantages.
- Sufficient power. A Dex-based fighter must be able to perform the role of a traditional Fighter in the party. His damage output must be relevant. No acrobatic trick or high touch AC is ever going to balance out the lack of a credible offensive threat.
- Fluff versatility. Dex-based melee combat is a beaufitul concept that fits well into various regions of the character landscape: Swashbucklers, Elven Rangers, Monks, Bards. All finessable weapons should be supported.

The easiest way to ensure balance would be a slow, escalating bonus to damage hard-coded into an archetype's level progression, as Sneak Attack is for the Rogue. The problem with that is that you lock the effect into a given base class (and its archetype), leaving little wiggle-room for fluff. That said, if the mechanic is reasonaly robust and elegant, one might want to make several matching archetypes for the different base classes, all using the same mechanic. (A conservative way to do this would be to use the pre-existing Sneak Attack mechanic. Maybe give 1d6/3 levels of Sneak Attack to certain Fighter and Ranger archetypes? Though a static damage bonus (as it is seen in Arcane Strike) would fit the Fighter's design philosophy better.)

Another mechanically easy way to do it would be to make it one or several feat. Feats are choosable by anyone and thus mesh with every existing melee base class. The problem there is the power balance. Some 3/4-BAB classes already have melee boosters build into the class (Rogues, Bards, Monks). One would have to take care not to make the new source of damage too powerful for those classes. My suggestions for that:
- Make the bonus dependent on BAB, like Power Attack. Fighters, Rangers, and Paladins are built with high-Str characters in mind. A Dex-based implementation of these classes is going to need a lot of support from the new feat.
- If Monks and dual-wielding Rogues and Bards threaten to unbalance things by getting too much leverage out of the feat, maybe have the bonus apply only to a single weapon (and maybe half to off-hand weapons?).

How about this?

Surgical Strike (Combat Feat)
You may not have the brawn to decapitate your foes, but if your blade is quick and steady, a well-placed stab is more than enough.
Prerequisite: Dex 15, Weapon Finesse
Benefit: While wielding a weapon using Weapon Finesse, you gain a bonus to the weapon damage roll. This bonus is equal to half your Dexterity modifier. If you are using a single one-handed weapon and are wielding neither a shield nor any off-hand weapons, the bonus is equal to your Dexterity modifier instead. Creatures immune to critical hits are also immune to the bonus damage from Surgical Strikes.

This rewards using Weapon Finesse without making Strength irrelevant.

To add more visibility to this issue, I've decoupled it as a separate thread here. If you wish to discuss it, it's probably better to do so over there where the posts won't be lost among the other UC feature requests.

Opinions?


Bring back the academy trained fighter from the original Inner Sea Guide.

Additional options or updates around the Exotic and Martial Weapon proficiency feats.

Alternatives to a divine-powered fighter based on alignment, so we're not forever stuck with the Paladin/Anti-Paladin dichotomy. I guess this was probably more appropriate in to putin UM but is sorely needed IMO.

Schools or styles of fighting broken out by a base fighting style 2-hander, dual wield, reach, 1h/shield,ranged(thrown or bow/xbow),unarmed that are applied independently of the APG archetypes.


B0sh1 wrote:
Bring back the academy trained fighter from the original Inner Sea Guide.

+1

Also, I suggest Int-to-damage rather than dex-to-damage as a more balanced option with finesse weapons.

Sczarni

i really want to see a way for characters to alter and enhance their weapons other than just magical enhancements

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
Catharsis wrote:

I can only join the chorus: Please help make Dex-based melee characters viable!

What is needed is a mechanic to increase the damage output of Finesse combattants,

pirahna strike

Liberty's Edge

Monkey Grip.

Sczarni

CapeCodRPGer wrote:
Monkey Grip.

YESSS!!!!

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Just FYI folks, I think that the work on the book is over for some time already, judging from designer comments here and there.


Gorbacz wrote:
Just FYI folks, I think that the work on the book is over for some time already, judging from designer comments here and there.

You're right, now it's more of a "what you hope shows up in UC"


Combat oriented prestige classes and archtypes.


Kaiyanwang wrote:
Eric Hinkle wrote:
Ellington wrote:

Copied from another thread, not my idea. I want this so bad. IT'S NOT TOO LATE TO FIX THE FIGHTER.

Martial Academy:

You have attended a war college or fighter school.
Prerequisites: This feat can be selected at first level if you are selecting fighter as your first class.

Benefit: Your fighter class has 4 + Int modifier skill ranks per level. Add 3 skills of your choice to the list of class skills. One of those skills must be a Knowledge skill.

Normal: A fighter has 2 + Int modifier skill ranks per level.

Special: You may select a specific martial academy if allowed by the GM. A fighter may select this feat as his first level bonus feat and can not be exchanged for a different feat.

I do like this idea. Maybe it could work as an archetype for the fighter class?

This is

1) awesome

2) works finely as a 1st level fighter only feat. for EVERY fighter.

3) is awesome for the imperial guard officers in my setting (wich are NOT cavaliers, since cavaliers have anoteher role in human society).

This is actually ridiculous, look at what you gain for one feat:

2 skill points EVERY level that may be used on anything you want and opening up skills which you wouldn't have access to short of taking another class (and thus losing out on the fighter class abilities) all for the cost of something you have an abundance of as a fighter.

This is so good no one would ever NOT choose it. Maybe, MAYBE, if you were to make a "fighter" only feat that gave you 2 skill points to use as you wanted when you took it, it might be balanced. But even then it would nullify several published feats that give a bonus to specific skills or open skills up as class skills.

Basically it is either extremely overpowered as presented, or walks all over the toes of previously established material and is a perfect example of "power creep."

So is it awesome? Yes, but in a bad for the game way.


Skylancer4 wrote:
Kaiyanwang wrote:
Eric Hinkle wrote:
Ellington wrote:

Copied from another thread, not my idea. I want this so bad. IT'S NOT TOO LATE TO FIX THE FIGHTER.

Martial Academy:

You have attended a war college or fighter school.
Prerequisites: This feat can be selected at first level if you are selecting fighter as your first class.

Benefit: Your fighter class has 4 + Int modifier skill ranks per level. Add 3 skills of your choice to the list of class skills. One of those skills must be a Knowledge skill.

Normal: A fighter has 2 + Int modifier skill ranks per level.

Special: You may select a specific martial academy if allowed by the GM. A fighter may select this feat as his first level bonus feat and can not be exchanged for a different feat.

I do like this idea. Maybe it could work as an archetype for the fighter class?

This is

1) awesome

2) works finely as a 1st level fighter only feat. for EVERY fighter.

3) is awesome for the imperial guard officers in my setting (wich are NOT cavaliers, since cavaliers have anoteher role in human society).

This is actually ridiculous, look at what you gain for one feat:

2 skill points EVERY level that may be used on anything you want and opening up skills which you wouldn't have access to short of taking another class (and thus losing out on the fighter class abilities) all for the cost of something you have an abundance of as a fighter.

This is so good no one would ever NOT choose it. Maybe, MAYBE, if you were to make a "fighter" only feat that gave you 2 skill points to use as you wanted when you took it, it might be balanced. But even then it would nullify several published feats that give a bonus to specific skills or open skills up as class skills.

Basically it is either extremely overpowered as presented, or walks all over the toes of previously established material and is a perfect example of "power creep."

So is it awesome? Yes, but in a bad for the game way.

Paizo already had this in the 1st Campaign setting book. I never looked at it as a must have, it was more of the noble/rich, classically trained type fighter. Maybe put a Int 13 or 14 minimum to it?


Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

I'd really like to see a few new feats/options in there.

I'd like a feat that allows someone with Weapon Finesse get 1/2 Str + 1/2 Dex Modifier for their main hand and 1/2 Dex for their off hand.

I'd like to see "Hide in Plain Sight" be an option for an advanced Rogue Talent.

I'd very much like a larger selection of poisons, with more informative creation guides. Such as gathering poison from natural creatures and preparing it/preserving it, growing poisonous plants and concentrating them into a workable poison, etc.

Really want to see more options for weapons/armor as well, such as new material/alloys!

Excited to see more on ship combat and information on airships. :)


Darkholme wrote:
LoreKeeper wrote:

Well, okay then. What do you propose is a fair price and cost?

I don't think firearms should be less than exotic weapons; they are as "out there" as it gets in a fantasy setting. But maybe it is enough to create a trait that grants access to firearm proficiency. I think a sensible cost would be 400gp, but that the firearm is always masterwork.

I'm not sure if there are other feats that you'd like to roll-into-one to make the barrier of entry lower.

I get that Paizo wants them to have exotic flavor. But for them to be exotic weapons (and thus require an exotic weapon feat) they should be more powerful, or don't make them more powerful, but make them martial or even simple weapons.
monskers wrote:
Darkholme wrote:
...

Solved.

Ultimate Combat Playtest 2 wrote:

Firearms in Your Campaign

Firearms and the gunslinger are not for every campaign,
and even if you are excited about introducing firearms into
your campaign, you should still make a decision of how
commonplace they are. The following are broad categories
of firearm rarity and the rules that govern them. The world of
Golarion uses the rules for emerging guns, which are also the
default category of gun rarity detailed in this document.
No Guns: If you do not want guns in your campaign, simply
do not allow the rules that follow. The Pathfinder Roleplaying
Game plays perfectly well without them.
Very Rare Guns: Early firearms are rare; advanced
firearms, the gunslinger alternate class, the Amateur
Gunslinger feat, and archetypes that use the firearm rules
do not exist in this type of campaign. Firearms are treated
more like magic items—things of wonder and mystery—
rather than like things that are mass produced. Few know
the strange secrets of firearm creation. Only NPCs can take
the Gunsmithing feat.
Emerging Guns: Firearms become more common. They
are mass-produced by small guilds or lone gunsmiths, a
dwarven clan, or maybe even a nation or two, but the secret
is slipping out, and the occasional rare adventurer uses guns.
The baseline gunslinger rules and the prices for ammunition
given in this document are for this type of campaign. Early
firearms are available, but are relatively rare. Gunslingers
must take the Craft Firearms feat just to make them feasible
weapons. Advanced firearms may exist, but only as rare and
wondrous items.
Commonplace Guns: While still expensive and tricky
to wield, early firearms are readily available. Instead of
requiring an Exotic Weapon Proficiency, all firearms are
martial weapons. Early firearms and their ammunition
cost 25% of the amount listed in this book, but advanced
firearms and their ammunition are still rare and cost full
price to buy or craft.
Guns Everywhere: Guns are commonplace. Early firearms
are seen as antiques, and advanced firearms are widespread.
Firearms are simple weapons, and early firearms, advanced
guns, and their ammunition are bought or crafted for 10%
of the cost listed in this document. The gunslinger loses the
gunsmith class feature and instead gains the gun training
class ability at 1st level.

Scarab Sages

Skylancer4 wrote:
2 skill points EVERY level that may be used on anything you want and opening up skills which you wouldn't have access to short of taking another class (and thus losing out on the fighter class abilities) all for the cost of something you have an abundance of as a fighter.

Most people build Fighters to excel at fighting, and be dumb schmucks otherwise. You'd be surprised how many would prefer an extra feat over some skill points. I for one would welcome the opportunity to make some more educated Fighters, even just for flavor reasons. There's no way two more maxxed skills would overpower a Fighter.

Even now, you can give a Fighter a 12 Int instead of an 8. You might just have to sacrifice some Dex or Con for it. That roughly corresponds to a feat (e.g. Toughness). Exceedingly few people are willing to make that trade-off.

I like the Fighter academy concept, but I would limit the extra skills handed out to avoid cherry-picking. Maybe I'd bundle them along "majors" you might have taken at the academy. An academic "Bodyguard" might get the coveted Perception, but not also Acrobatics and UMD. (Then again, thanks to Traits, it is extremely easy to get access to class skills nowadays.)

Liberty's Edge

The latest Order of the Stick deals with smart vs. Dumb fighters.


Skylancer4 wrote:
Ellington wrote:

Copied from another thread, not my idea. I want this so bad. IT'S NOT TOO LATE TO FIX THE FIGHTER.

Martial Academy:

You have attended a war college or fighter school.
Prerequisites: This feat can be selected at first level if you are selecting fighter as your first class.

Benefit: Your fighter class has 4 + Int modifier skill ranks per level. Add 3 skills of your choice to the list of class skills. One of those skills must be a Knowledge skill.

Normal: A fighter has 2 + Int modifier skill ranks per level.

Special: You may select a specific martial academy if allowed by the GM. A fighter may select this feat as his first level bonus feat and can not be exchanged for a different feat.

This is actually ridiculous, look at what you gain for one feat:

2 skill points EVERY level that may be used on anything you want and opening up skills which you wouldn't have access to short of taking another class (and thus losing out on the fighter class abilities) all for the cost of something you have an abundance of as a fighter.

This is so good no one would ever NOT choose it. Maybe, MAYBE, if you were to make a "fighter" only feat that gave you 2 skill points to use as you wanted when you took it, it might be balanced. But even then it would nullify several published feats that give a bonus to specific skills or open skills up as class skills.

Basically it is either extremely overpowered as presented, or walks all over the toes of previously established material and is a perfect example of "power creep."

So is it awesome? Yes, but in a bad for the game way.

Yes, when I wanted to use this my DM made the trade-off for Medium and heavy armour proficiency at 1st level, and 8th & 16th level feats. He also gave me more class skills, though!


I wouldn't mind seeing a feat that allows you to adjust the crit range of a particular weapon by 1. If you were concerned about people applying this to the 18-20 weapons, you could put a caveat in that the maxumum base crit range before critical enhancement effects is 18-20 and each time you take the feat it applies to a new weapon, so you could never step down more than one tier. MANY classes could benefit from this (I am looking at you magus) so you aren't shoe horned into X weapon because it has a 18-20 crit range.

Additionally, for further balance, you could put in a character level (not class) or some sort of stat pre-preq or simply have Weapon Focus as a pre-req, many options that could be applied.


I'm hoping for a Mad Bomber archetype for the Alchemist.


B0sh1 wrote:

I wouldn't mind seeing a feat that allows you to adjust the crit range of a particular weapon by 1. If you were concerned about people applying this to the 18-20 weapons, you could put a caveat in that the maxumum base crit range before critical enhancement effects is 18-20 and each time you take the feat it applies to a new weapon, so you could never step down more than one tier. MANY classes could benefit from this (I am looking at you magus) so you aren't shoe horned into X weapon because it has a 18-20 crit range.

Additionally, for further balance, you could put in a character level (not class) or some sort of stat pre-preq or simply have Weapon Focus as a pre-req, many options that could be applied.

Actually, it already exists in the keen property and in the Improved Critical feat. The problem (as many see it) is that these are not stackable in any way.

What would be nice is an errata that allows them to be stacked to an extent: One increases the threat range, the other increases the critical multiplier by one ... just a thought!


Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

A few other things I'd like to see, if not in Ultimate Combat then at least in another book at some point in the near future.

The ability to perform traditional metallurgy for campaigns that limit who can work with rare metals such as Mithral and Adamantine. Basically making it a blacksmithing check to actually prepare the metal to be worked into whatever form is needed, then a follow-up crafting roll to make the resulting item.

The ability to create "inventions" based around engineering. The way I've houseruled it is a Knowledge: Engineering check followed by a Wisdom check (to see if they catch any possible flaws it might have) followed by a Profession (Scribe) check or something similar to make the blueprints/plans, then a couple craft checks related to the item that's being built. Blacksmithing if it's made of metal, Woodworking if it's made out of wood, Weaponsmithing/Armorsmithing if the device has some form of armor or weapons, basically turning the device into a project.

I let people make an item without blueprints to skip a step at a slight penalty to their overall craft checks.. but it also gives them a negative to their wisdom check to see any possible design flaws before the item is built and tested.

After all is said and done, there's a slight "Prototyping/Testing" phase that allows them to see how viable the item is and fix any other issues it may have.

That's the best way I've found to handle high tech crafting, when making new ship, airship, wagon, etc innovations as well as seige engines and other types of engineering devices.

Also, would really really really like to see more stealth related Rogue Talents like the ability to pick up Hide in Plain Sight as an advanced Rogue Talent, or another Rogue Talent that allows for a double move/run at a lesser penalty while stealthing. Sometimes you want to be able to make stealth checks without severely impacting your overland movement.. etc.

Just a few thoughts. :)


How about a mace with heads on both ends like the two bladed sword.
Another idea would be a shield with short knives on the edges so it can double as a slicing weapon and still protect you.


Dabbler wrote:
B0sh1 wrote:

I wouldn't mind seeing a feat that allows you to adjust the crit range of a particular weapon by 1. If you were concerned about people applying this to the 18-20 weapons, you could put a caveat in that the maxumum base crit range before critical enhancement effects is 18-20 and each time you take the feat it applies to a new weapon, so you could never step down more than one tier. MANY classes could benefit from this (I am looking at you magus) so you aren't shoe horned into X weapon because it has a 18-20 crit range.

Additionally, for further balance, you could put in a character level (not class) or some sort of stat pre-preq or simply have Weapon Focus as a pre-req, many options that could be applied.

Actually, it already exists in the keen property and in the Improved Critical feat. The problem (as many see it) is that these are not stackable in any way.

What would be nice is an errata that allows them to be stacked to an extent: One increases the threat range, the other increases the critical multiplier by one ... just a thought!

This, with the purpose of spreading the mess of falcata to every weapon, or to despoil the fighter of his capstone?

Sorry of being harsh, but I don't understand why this change should be done.

Silver Crusade

I would like to see a feat that gives a Paladin a 2nd use of his divine weapon calss ability or allows him to split up the number of miniutes per day of his divine weapon ability.

I would also like to see a feat that increases your critical Multiplier by one 2x to 3x.

Reword the Great cleave feat remove the word ajecent and replace it with any target with in your threatend area.

Improved Power attack doubbles power attack damage for a-x to hit that follows a progression simular to power attack

remove the Fighter only from Weapons speicalzation and replace with all martial types.


Darkholme wrote:
Ultimate Combat looks like it may be the first book I opt out of. I may get it, but it's the first pathfinder book I've even been skeptical of.

We barely know any of its content and you're opting out of it? Personally, the Gunslinger class alone is enough to make me excited for the book (I have a player who is using the current playtest and loving it).

Quote:
Everyone's focusing on the playtest of the 3 classes currently available, but the types of archetypes I want to see (that would easily belong in Ultimate Combat) aren't the ones presented. While a cowboy, a ninja, and a samurai are cool, they aren't things I need in my games, and will see marginal amounts of use.

One base class, two alternate classes. Yes, there is a difference, and no, there's almost no focus on the Ninja and Samurai at this point; Pazio's development team basically said that they have all the feedback they need on those two alternate classes and I think Round 2 on the Gunslinger is officially over.

Quote:
and the presence or absence of these things largely determines the worth of the book to me.

I find this a little bit self-righteous, as we don't know WHAT is in the book. There could be TONS of hidden little surprises that you love. For example, in Ultimate Magic, I had no idea that the Cleric was getting alternate Channel Energies, but I personally LOVE them now that I have the book.

Quote:
Cavalier: Light or No armor, lose the horse - Put the focus on the honour bound dueling gentleman.

The Cavalier is all about the Mount; I think your idea would be better suited as a Rogue archetype with either a specific order or an order similar to how a Samurai has its own "Favored" orders.

Quote:
Fighter: Some kind of Swashbuckler-esque archetype maybe. Think 3 musketeers.

The Fighter is really all about supreme weapon skill, at its core. This is enough thing that is more likely to be seen as a Rogue archetype in my opin ... wait, Swashbuckler IS a Rogue archetype ....

Quote:
Gunslinger: ]A weapon independent class based around Grit - for melee Grit characters

I don't know if you're insinuating that you want a Firearms-less Gunslinger, and if it is, that is never going to happen. The Gunslinger is already pretty firearms independent; its progression is very reminiscent of the Fighter's Weapon Training. Now, I could see a Gunslinger that Two-Weapon Fought with a melee weapon in their main hand and a gun in their offhand, using grit.

Quote:
Monk: A no-ki pool, no supernatural abilities monk - Give me an over-the-top Jackie Chan. Full BAB on Combat Maneuvers, and free combat maneuver feats would be awesome.

Ki is the essential class feature of ALL Monk Archetypes to date. That would be like asking for a Bloodline-less Sorcerer or a Mystery-less Oracle. I think you'll see a Monk that uses their ki for more combat-oriented effects, but nothing that totally replaces it.

Quote:
Monk: Elemental Monks - Fire, Water, Earth, Air - Think Avatar the last airbender type stuff.

There is already an Elemental Fist archetype, and it is nothing like what you want. I doubt that a bender-like Monk will be in Ultimate Combat; such an endeavor would have been much suited for Ultimate Magic, which was focused on the magical and supernatural.

Quote:
Ranger: A 'free hand fighter' combat style.

I hope so too. Free-hand fighting doesn't get nearly as much love as it should. It was a fully respectable combat style back in the day.

Quote:
Ranger: A Musket combat style and a pistol combat style.

I think its more likely that there will be a general "firearms" combat style with all of the non-grit firearms feats associated with it. Probably an archetype focused on granting the ranger guns as well. The announced "Big Game Hunter" is a prime candidate in my opinion.

Quote:
Rogue: A firearm focused rogue archetype. - maybe a sniper type.

As far as we know, I don't think there's a sniper rifle in Ultimate Combat (I could be wrong). I'm thinking more of an Outlaw archetype; THAT would be epic.

Quote:

Feats/Abilities:

Some love for all the 'free hand fighter' type builds, and some ways to make Sword + Board more appealing as well.

Sword and Board is already powerful (especially on a Ranger, who can ignore a lot of its prerequisites), so I don't know how much support we'll see, but the lack of support for freehand fighting makes me agree with you on that point.

101 to 140 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Ultimate Combat - Content requests All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Product Discussion