Ah, Crane Technique


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 300 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Maxximilius wrote:
Aelryinth wrote:


But, c'est la vies.

===Aelryinth

/Frenchgrammarnazi

"C'est la vie", actually. Only one per people, nine by cat, it's the rule.

Also, if you are the kind of DM to throw at your player a guy who can sunder his bow by cutting the "+0" string, you're not the kind of DM I would touch with a 10' pole.
I guess you allow your players to break the pommel of a sword, making it "unusable because it is too much unbalanced now" ? Or maybe "the hilt can be sundered so it can't be wielded anymore" ? Is only the blade enchanted ? The edge ? The head of a hammer ?
A string is as much part of a bow than a cross is part of a gun, please don't be silly here.

No, he's right. The people in question are Pathfinder characters and subject to resurrection, reincarnation, reanimation, the clone spell, and that one witch archetype that can use her familiar as a magic jar if she dies so vies can indeed be plural.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:


I ALREADY mentioned mob situations. I already mentioned missile and magic. I'm referring to melee combat.

If by mentioning them you mean completely disregarding them as viable alternatives, I suppose you did.

As mentioned before, grappling doesn't use a weapon, though natural weapons could be seen as qualifying, so you may have a point there.

Once again, this is posing a battle that really doesn't happen that often. It's a corner case, and one where the player shines. What's the problem with that?

How many monsters have no solution to this? Please, test this out with a real game first before making claims like this.

You know what, I'm going to do just that. I'll take the feats for my monk in my Savage Tide game, and if it changes my mind, and the feats are too good, I'll be the first to jump on this thread and eat crow.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Aelryinth, let's follow your logic and see where it takes us...

If you are right and that the bow is +4, but the string is +0, than the +0 string is firing +0 arrows, thereby negating the benefit of having it enchanted at all (except, I guess, to protect the bar from sundering, for all the good that does).

...right down the rabbit hole.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Atarlost wrote:


No, he's right. The people in question are Pathfinder characters and subject to resurrection, reincarnation, reanimation, the clone spell, and that one witch archetype that can use her familiar as a magic jar if she dies so vies can indeed be plural.

/Frenchgrammarnazi

Using it in the plural sense doesn't seem to be the original intention. And even then, it would not have been written "la vies" since "la" is for a feminine singular ; but "les vies", or "ce sont les vies", which are both terrible, totally unused distortions of the expression.
Actually, these versions would without a doubt get you a reaction of "what ? This isn't even french" when the people around you finally understands you weren't speaking about the "Levi" brand, or a sound from the beginning.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:

Aelryinth, let's follow your logic and see where it takes us...

If you are right and that the bow is +4, but the string is +0, than the +0 string is firing +0 arrows, thereby negating the benefit of having it enchanted at all (except, I guess, to protect the bar from sundering, for all the good that does).

...right down the rabbit hole.

Not even getting to answer the burning question - which part of my +2 siege crossbow carries the enchantment...


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Crane technique: If do right, no can defense.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think I mentioned this elsewhere, but Crane Wing/Crane Riposte can stack with the Duelist's Parry/Riposte ability (as long as you wield a siangham in combat). Bwahaha!

Bwahaha! (again)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
ohako wrote:

I think I mentioned this elsewhere, but Crane Wing/Crane Riposte can stack with the Duelist's Parry/Riposte ability (as long as you wield a siangham in combat). Bwahaha!

Bwahaha! (again)

Why use a siangham? I find a rapier or a scimitar(with Dervish Dance) works much better.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:


And how is the fighter ever getting his second attack in?

Likewise, why wouldn't an attempted grapple provoke the deflection and AoO? It's still considered an attack roll, even if you're trying to grip and rend instead of cut and poke.

What it allows you to do is completely shut down any foe you want to completely shut down in melee. That is Extremely Powerful. I ALREADY mentioned mob situations. I already mentioned missile and magic. I'm referring to melee combat.

===Aelryinth

I think you're missing the "melee weapon" clause in there, with a grapple, there (usually) is no weapon present and it is not an attack roll against the target's AC.

Personally, if the grab ability was present on a creature's natural weapon(s), the Crane feats would deflect the attack and the grab. But, if the creature initiated a grapple attempt separately from an attack roll against the target's AC, I'd allow the grapple.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:
underling wrote:

OK, this is kind of silly.

Has anyone even looked at a non-hypothetical scenario?

A monk must be minimum level 7 to use this feat chain in full. That's a BAB of 5. Add a +1 for weapon focus unarmed, and another +1 for an amulet of mighty fist (since the devs in their infinite wisdom chose to nerf brass knuckles) and assume an 18 strength or dex (for the wpn finesse crowd) and you get a total of +11 on an AOO. When using this style, its +10.

OK. Since I assume you want a fair assessment, lets use a fighter 7 with a standard melee weapon. That's +7/+2 BAB, with a 20 strength (the 3000gp cheaper a +1 weapon is than the +1 amulet makes a +2 belt of strength easily attainable), weapon focus, weapon training, and a +1 weapon. your total to hit bonus is a 15. Great your first hit is negated. The second attack that can't be negated is at +10.... the same bonus as the monk's AOO.

At best, this puts a monk on a relatively even footing in a one on one combat against an equal level fighter-type opponent. You are not unbeatable, and most scenarios will not allow this clean of a match up. When counting mob fights, mages, big beasts, etc... this feat chain is nice, but far from the best.

And how is the fighter ever getting his second attack in?

because its a duel. They're fighting one on one, mano y mano, toe to toe - full attacks baby. And a fighter has 2 attacks a round at level 7 even if they aren't 2 weapon wielders (who always get 2+ attacks, and can therefore get past crane style).

reread the text of the feat:

From the Blog wrote:
Once per round while using Crane Style, when you have at least one hand free and are either fighting defensively or using the total defense action, you can deflect one melee weapon attack that would normally hit you. You expend no action to deflect the attack, but you must be aware of it and not flat-footed. An attack so deflected deals no damage to you.

ONCE per round, deflect ONE attack that would otherwise hit. Done. Proven. So to recap, any level character that fights with two weapons, or any fighter equivalent of over 7th level can at most have 1 attack blocked per round by crane style. Even in a duel, that leaves a second shot (2 more if you are a 2 weapon wielding fighter of 6+ level) with a chance of getting through to the monk. nice defensive chain. I'm not really sure yet if its actually worth it or not. Undefeatable? Only if you ignore half of the rules regarding combat, and if you're willing to do that, just about any feat is undefeatable.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Shadowborn wrote:
Crane technique: If do right, no can defense.

Freakin sweet.

On a side note, this feat is obviously supposed to emulate deflect arrows but for melee attacks. Why is it do you think the designers decided to give this one an extra bonus over deflect arrows? The bonus being that gargantuan and colossal weapons don't stop it.

It isn't unbalancing, it just seems inconsistent, thoughts?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Swivl wrote:


You know what, I'm going to do just that. I'll take the feats for my monk in my Savage Tide game, and if it changes my mind, and the feats are too good, I'll be the first to jump on this thread and eat crow.

I look forward to your results.


13 people marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

And I don't have to sunder your +4 bow. I have to sunder your +0 bowstring.

===Aelryinth

Now that you mention it. There is no rule that says I need a bowstring at all to shoot my bow. Sunder away.


underling wrote:


ONCE per round, deflect ONE attack that would otherwise hit. Done. Proven. So to recap, any level character that fights with two weapons, or any fighter equivalent of over 7th level can at most have 1 attack blocked per round by crane style. Even in a duel, that leaves a second shot (2 more if you are a 2 weapon wielding fighter of 6+ level) with a chance of getting through to the monk. nice defensive chain. I'm not really sure yet if its actually worth it or not. Undefeatable? Only if you ignore half of the rules regarding combat, and if you're willing to do that, just about any feat is undefeatable.

I think you miss the point that the monk still has a AC to beat.

I have not done the whole math, but even an unoptimized monk has a decent AC when fighting defensively with Crane style (10 Base + 2 Wis + 2 Dex + 1 Dodge + 2 Monk + 4 Fighting Defensively = 19 AC + Items = 20+).
Do the calcuation how often both attacks of an equivalent fighter will hit to do some damage.

On the other hand the flurring monk has 3 attacks plus an AoO. He also needs a high number to hit - however the favor of landing at least one damaging strike has shifted to the monk in my view...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ploppy wrote:
...an unoptimized monk has a decent AC when fighting defensively with Crane style (10 Base + 2 Wis + 2 Dex + 1 Dodge + 2 Monk + 4 Fighting Defensively = 19 AC + Items = 20+).

Fighting defensively adds +2 to AC, not +4. Total defense adds +4 to AC, but makes attacking -- including via AoO -- impossible.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

What about simply feinting in combat to flat foot your opponent. wouldn't that negate crane style? I don't have the book in front of me right now but almost all the style feats have the "you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed caveat"


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Spes Magna Mark wrote:
Ploppy wrote:
...an unoptimized monk has a decent AC when fighting defensively with Crane style (10 Base + 2 Wis + 2 Dex + 1 Dodge + 2 Monk + 4 Fighting Defensively = 19 AC + Items = 20+).

Fighting defensively adds +2 to AC, not +4. Total defense adds +4 to AC, but makes attacking -- including via AoO -- impossible.

The Crane Style feats add +1 AC when fighting defensively while reducing the attack penalty to -1. Having 3 ranks in Acrobatics adds an additional +1 AC when fighting defensively.

Therefore, +4.

This can become as high as +8 AC/-1 attack with certain builds.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Christopher Van Horn wrote:
What about simply feinting in combat to flat foot your opponent. wouldn't that negate crane style? I don't have the book in front of me right now but almost all the style feats have the "you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed caveat"

A successful feint does not make the target flat-footed, it denies them their Dexterity bonus to AC. The two are similar but different.


Fozbek wrote:
Christopher Van Horn wrote:
What about simply feinting in combat to flat foot your opponent. wouldn't that negate crane style? I don't have the book in front of me right now but almost all the style feats have the "you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed caveat"
A successful feint does not make the target flat-footed, it denies them their Dexterity bonus to AC. The two are similar but different.

Isnt that pretty much flat? Also when dex AC is denied. So is dodge, which fighting defensively gives you.

On the bright side. The feint is vs BAB or sense motive.


I want to point out two more downsides to a spring-attack monk using this feat: BAB during move-and-attack and BAB during attacks-of-opportunity.

A monk who moves and attacks uses their native 3/4 BAB progression, not the full progression from flurry. Likewise, on attacks of opportunity, they only use their base BAB. So in addition to the -1 from fighting defensively, they're also taking a -1 per 4 levels from not being able to flurry. Really, if I was a fighter being attacked by a monk like this, I'd just ignore him, or possibly fight defensively myself. I have a higher attack to absorb the attack penalty, so I'm still effective, and with the AC boost, the monk will probably have to roll rather high to hit me. If he chooses to stand and fight, he can get his flurry, but I can get my full attack.


Bobson wrote:

I want to point out two more downsides to a spring-attack monk using this feat: BAB during move-and-attack and BAB during attacks-of-opportunity.

A monk who moves and attacks uses their native 3/4 BAB progression, not the full progression from flurry. Likewise, on attacks of opportunity, they only use their base BAB. So in addition to the -1 from fighting defensively, they're also taking a -1 per 4 levels from not being able to flurry. Really, if I was a fighter being attacked by a monk like this, I'd just ignore him, or possibly fight defensively myself. I have a higher attack to absorb the attack penalty, so I'm still effective, and with the AC boost, the monk will probably have to roll rather high to hit me. If he chooses to stand and fight, he can get his flurry, but I can get my full attack.

Seems that killed all the haters. :P

But seriously: in a straight fight one on one the fighter would always win in the end. He is a fighter after all. The monk might want to rather try grappling or something.

That said, I love monks and crane style seems to be my favorite at this stage. that one less hit a round sounds like fun ^_^

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

A hilt is not a detachable on demand, replaceable part of a sword. Nor is an arrow. The magic on the arrow applies when it is launched, not a moment before.

The only analogy you could make to a sword would be if someone had a chain gauntlet attached to it...and by your argument, that chain would now have the sword's magic, and be untargetable and unsunderable. Which also makes no sense.

The CMD would be the same for bow or string, but one destroys the bow, the other just makes it momentarily unusable.

Heck, look at that recent storyline on the Paizo blog. Sneaks into camp, leaves them the bows...destroys the bowstrings. There's nothing magical about the bowstrings...you add them in and out as needed, especially as it rains. Going after the bowstring is always more viable then the bow.

As for the duel, why is your Crane guy letting the other person have full attacks? I'm extremely confused why he would let him do so. 2 attacks to 0 is a much handier ratio then 2 attacks to 1. I did mention Spring Attack for a reason, and by level 7 it's quite easy to have it for a human monk or a fighter.

You aren't talking about a duel; you're talking about a tanking slugfest, and a Crane stylist isn't going to play that game, and the other melee can't make him play that game. Unlike an archer, few Melees can get full attacks all the time, and thus 'outrun' that parry ability. The inability to move and make full attacks makes this ability MUCH more powerful then Dodge Missile.

As for what part of a Siege Crossbow is magical - I'd guess the part that is wood, no? Since if you cut the string on it, you'd have to crank the windlass back to reset it, but the Crossbow would NOT be destroyed as a true sunder attempt would make it...unless the DM had the windlass break as the string snapped from the tension release, but I doubt a magic xbow would break thence.

As for targeting the string, that is absolutely no different then the fact that the wooden haft of an axe is the target of a Sunder attempt, not the metal head. You strike at the part that is vulnerable...hafts, however, are not detachable on magic weapons like strings are on bows.

==Aelryinth


How do you get all of crane style and spring attack by level 5? or even 7 for that matter?

And as noted, nothing by RAW suggests you need a bowstring to shoot, so if your going to be wacky about it so can everyone else. You need a bow to shoot, if you consider the string a part of the bow then you need it to shoot, but being part of the bow means it gets the same enchantment as the bow, so if you don't consider it a part that gets enchanted then by RAW you don't need it to shoot.

But seriously, being really good in a one on one VS. one of 13 classes (if he doesn't have a bow handy) after a 6 feat investment doesn't even seem good let alone unbalanced.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

A hilt is not a detachable on demand, replaceable part of a sword. Nor is an arrow. The magic on the arrow applies when it is launched, not a moment before.

The only analogy you could make to a sword would be if someone had a chain gauntlet attached to it...and by your argument, that chain would now have the sword's magic, and be untargetable and unsunderable. Which also makes no sense.

The CMD would be the same for bow or string, but one destroys the bow, the other just makes it momentarily unusable.

I can't believe you're sticking to this.

There are no rules attached to bows regarding their strings, at all. The story is just that, a story. It doesn't mention in the story that whoever destroyed the bowstrings was ignoring the Pathfinder rules for sundering a weapon. You made that connection yourself.

There are no rules, and no precedent for the rules to suggest your view of sundering works in Pathfinder. I get the feeling we're playing completely different games.

Scarab Sages

Aelryinth wrote:

A hilt is not a detachable on demand, replaceable part of a sword. Nor is an arrow. The magic on the arrow applies when it is launched, not a moment before.

The only analogy you could make to a sword would be if someone had a chain gauntlet attached to it...and by your argument, that chain would now have the sword's magic, and be untargetable and unsunderable. Which also makes no sense.

The CMD would be the same for bow or string, but one destroys the bow, the other just makes it momentarily unusable.

Heck, look at that recent storyline on the Paizo blog. Sneaks into camp, leaves them the bows...destroys the bowstrings. There's nothing magical about the bowstrings...you add them in and out as needed, especially as it rains. Going after the bowstring is always more viable then the bow.

As for the duel, why is your Crane guy letting the other person have full attacks? I'm extremely confused why he would let him do so. 2 attacks to 0 is a much handier ratio then 2 attacks to 1. I did mention Spring Attack for a reason, and by level 7 it's quite easy to have it for a human monk or a fighter.

You aren't talking about a duel; you're talking about a tanking slugfest, and a Crane stylist isn't going to play that game, and the other melee can't make him play that game. Unlike an archer, few Melees can get full attacks all the time, and thus 'outrun' that parry ability. The inability to move and make full attacks makes this ability MUCH more powerful then Dodge Missile.

As for what part of a Siege Crossbow is magical - I'd guess the part that is wood, no? Since if you cut the string on it, you'd have to crank the windlass back to reset it, but the Crossbow would NOT be destroyed as a true sunder attempt would make it...unless the DM had the windlass break as the string snapped from the tension release, but I doubt a magic xbow would break thence.

As for targeting the string, that is absolutely no different then the fact that the wooden haft of an axe is the target of a Sunder attempt, not the metal...

Your spring attack build doesn't even work before 9th level. There is no way to gain all of the feats in the Crane style chain and spring attack before that level.

In addition, if you're spring attacking you are using your monk BAB, which is +6 instead of your flurry base attack. So, looking at a reasonable build, we can assume a high end of 18 for str(+4 to hit), amulet of mighty blows +1 (+2 is 20k, ridiculously expensive), and weapon focus unarmared for a total to hit of +12 to hit. Even spending 1/2 of his wealth on the +2 amulet, we're only at +13.

A ninth level fighter could easily have full plate +2, large shield +2, dodge, ring of protection +2, amulet of natural armor +2 and a dex of 12 for an AC of 31. Please note that this is not even optimized for max AC for a fighter of that level. That leaves the monk only hitting on an 18+. if the fighter fights defensively (once he sees what's going on), the monk only hits on a natural 20.

What do I call that? Stalemate.

Oh, and as for the argument of this feat chain being too good, rather than stalemate, I'll suggest checkmate.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Underling, would a fighter not be able to get all of those feats AND make better use of his full base attack bonus?

You're right that a monk isn't that great with the build, but what about the fighter?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Haft isn't detachable? Of course it is! It takes a bit of time but it certainly can be replaced. Just like parts of the sword hilt (guard, pommel and something actually wrapped around swords's blade inside). Bow strings can also be detached and then cut, but once attached they aren't easily sunderable. Sabotaging magic weapons in a way isn't impossible, but it can't be done by simply trying to smash them with mundane tools.

Scarab Sages

Ravingdork wrote:

Underling, would a fighter not be able to get all of those feats AND make better use of his full base attack bonus?

You're right that a monk isn't that great with the build, but what about the fighter?

As I don't yet have the book, I have no idea if this feat chain works with weapons. However, I can't imagine any reason a fighter with imp unarmed strike wouldn't make use of the feats.

But as we saw upthread, magic, missile attacks, combat maneuvers and grapples already would bypass this defense. The only reasons I focused on the fighter vs. monk angle was that the OP keeps rigidly defining the parameter for what qualifies as a duel. Since he feels free to discard any conditions that don't support his position, I felt it best to just disprove his position on his own terms.

Great examples of how the argument keeps being more narrowly defined is the OP's stance that you can sunder parts of enchanted items that somehow are not enchanted? The entire bow is enchanted, but the OP thinks you can dismiss the threat posed by a missile attack against this build by saying they'd sunder the '+0 bowstring'. Um...that has no basis in any incarnation of D&D, Pathfinder or whatever that I have ever played. We're not here to argue about house rules, just the RAW and this feat chain.
Another one is the insistence that a duelist wouldn't stand toe to toe. They'd prance around using spring attack, running around their opponent. When I suggested that going toe to toe, was dueling I was told that was a slugfest - evidently dueling must be mobile to count. All of those iconic duels where lightning fast steel weaves between opponents were evidently not duels. Drizzt and Artemis, any samurai duel ever described, Friar Tuck & Robin Hood on the log, any Arthurian knight's challenge, hell the black knight from Monty Python all were 'slugfests' and don't qualify as duels. This ridiculously favors this chain, as it sidesteps the major limitation in an artificial and, frankly outlandish way.

RD, the deal is that this argument is silly. And I have a problem with it because monks have so few things to be happy about, that if new feat chains are added that give monks/martial artists some new tricks, I'm happy. The last thing I want to see is overblown complaints doom another usable monk idea to the trash heap (brass knuckles anyone?) because of (wrongly) perceived imbalance.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

I really hope you're not suggesting that a taut string is harder to cut then a loose one laying on the ground...and somehow you're mistaking a hilt as something 'detachable on demand', instead of 'replaceable by a skilled craftsman with a lot of time and work.'

As for slugfests, if you read the Drizz't duels, they're all about movement, footwork, and correct placement of blows...they aren't about sitting in place and slugging one another. Since there are no parries in standard D@D at ANY level of the game, none of the duels that Drizz't fights are even possible...ingame, he would have hit Entreri with EVERY SINGLE SWING, and Entreri would have hit him. Drizz't had, what, a 24 AC? 20th level fighter? Specialized, finesse with a 20 dex, +3 to +5 weapon, and no penalties for dual wielding in earlier versions of the game?

He couldn't miss.

And also note that Drizzt wears his bracers of speed on his feet, not his hands. Because footwork and mobility is important.

Authorial characters can do all sorts of stuff game characters can't.

==Aelryinth


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Like, for example, cutting bowstrings...


Aelryinth wrote:

I really hope you're not suggesting that a taut string is harder to cut then a loose one laying on the ground...and somehow you're mistaking a hilt as something 'detachable on demand', instead of 'replaceable by a skilled craftsman with a lot of time and work.'

As for slugfests, if you read the Drizz't duels, they're all about movement, footwork, and correct placement of blows...they aren't about sitting in place and slugging one another. Since there are no parries in standard D@D at ANY level of the game, none of the duels that Drizz't fights are even possible...ingame, he would have hit Entreri with EVERY SINGLE SWING, and Entreri would have hit him. Drizz't had, what, a 24 AC? 20th level fighter? Specialized, finesse with a 20 dex, +3 to +5 weapon, and no penalties for dual wielding in earlier versions of the game?

He couldn't miss.

And also note that Drizzt wears his bracers of speed on his feet, not his hands. Because footwork and mobility is important.

Authorial characters can do all sorts of stuff game characters can't.

==Aelryinth

Ummm... What does this have to do with the crane style feats?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Swivl wrote:
What does this have to do with the crane style feats?

Paizonian A defines "dueling" as X.

Paizonian B defines "dueling" as Y.

Paizonian A posts about dueling as he sees it. Which prompts a response from Paizonian B about how he sees dueling.

-Kurocyn


Kurocyn wrote:
Swivl wrote:
What does this have to do with the crane style feats?

Paizonian A defines "dueling" as X.

Paizonian B defines "dueling" as Y.

Paizonian A posts about dueling as he sees it. Which prompts a response from Paizonian B about how he sees dueling.

-Kurocyn

Granted. But, wasn't the thread about the problems with how this feat functions in the game? If not, then I have nothing more to contribute. At this point, if it's flavor concerns, YMMV.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

I really hope you're not suggesting that a taut string is harder to cut then a loose one laying on the ground...and somehow you're mistaking a hilt as something 'detachable on demand', instead of 'replaceable by a skilled craftsman with a lot of time and work.'

As for slugfests, if you read the Drizz't duels, they're all about movement, footwork, and correct placement of blows...they aren't about sitting in place and slugging one another. Since there are no parries in standard D@D at ANY level of the game, none of the duels that Drizz't fights are even possible...ingame, he would have hit Entreri with EVERY SINGLE SWING, and Entreri would have hit him. Drizz't had, what, a 24 AC? 20th level fighter? Specialized, finesse with a 20 dex, +3 to +5 weapon, and no penalties for dual wielding in earlier versions of the game?

He couldn't miss.

And also note that Drizzt wears his bracers of speed on his feet, not his hands. Because footwork and mobility is important.

Authorial characters can do all sorts of stuff game characters can't.

==Aelryinth

I give up. You ignore the rules that you don't like and continue to argue as if no one has pointed out how your position doesn't line up with the RAW. What you are doing when you change rules for things like sunder is called creating house rules. I have no desire to discuss your house rules, as they are 100% under your control. If you think the feats are broken after numerous people demonstrated how they are most assuredly not, than house rule them. ban them. Heck, color over those entries in your UC book with a sharpie. Make any rules you want.

But realize that they are not the RAW. In the non-house ruled Paizo universe, the crane style feat chain adds some pretty decent defensive boosts to the characters that use it. But it is situational and easily circumvented.

Now, I'm going to go download the Ultimate Combat PDF in a couple of days, and my group and I will try the rules out the way they are intended to be used. No sundered +0 bowstrings, no bouncy cartwheeling duels specifically with more restrictions than olympic fencing (all to favor the crane guy!), but actual correctly used RAW PFRPG. I'll come back and let you know how they work after that.


I was unaware you could do a called shot to a bow string as part of a sunder. As far as I am aware attempting to sunder targets an item held or worn. The bowstring is a small part of a bow, there are no rules for called shots for 'parts' of weapons. Hence the sunder must be against the main part of the weapon (the bow).

If you want to house rule it otherwise I suggest increasing the AC of the bowstring massively as it is protect by the bow and usually the arms of the weilder. I was suggest increasing the bowstring's AC by 8. It is only a move action to restring a bow anyway or free is you have quick draw as bows are not kept strung so the assumption is you string the bow as you draw it. Of course you have to have spare bowstrings.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

I really hope you're not suggesting that a taut string is harder to cut then a loose one laying on the ground...and somehow you're mistaking a hilt as something 'detachable on demand', instead of 'replaceable by a skilled craftsman with a lot of time and work.'

Could be, as bow's echantment magic crawls over the attached string and protects it from the moment it became part of the weapon and leaves it as soon as it's detached.

Aelryinth wrote:


As for slugfests, if you read the Drizz't duels, they're all about movement, footwork, and correct placement of blows...they aren't about sitting in place and slugging one another. Since there are no parries in standard D@D at ANY level of the game, none of the duels that Drizz't fights are even possible...ingame, he would have hit Entreri with EVERY SINGLE SWING, and Entreri would have hit him. Drizz't had, what, a 24 AC? 20th level fighter? Specialized, finesse with a 20 dex, +3 to +5 weapon, and no penalties for dual wielding in earlier versions of the game?

He couldn't miss.

And also note that Drizzt wears his bracers of speed on his feet, not his hands. Because footwork and mobility is important.

Authorial characters can do all sorts of stuff game characters can't.

==Aelryinth

Well, since every hit deals some kind of abstract hit point damage and not clearly defined wounds, it could be like fatigue and attrition of luck, where both fighters are slowly loosing their ability to deflect and suddenly the blow is struck and it's all over. Mechanics of the combat and describtion could differ. BTW the bracers of speed (or whatever item for that matter) work wherever you wear them, they just take up an aproppriately named slot where they are usually worn. So it's just fancy describtion again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lokius wrote:
I was unaware you could do a called shot to a bow string as part of a sunder.

That's exactly the point. Normally, you can't.

Lokius wrote:
...It is only a move action to restring a bow anyway or free is you have quick draw as bows are not kept strung so the assumption is you string the bow as you draw it. Of course you have to have spare bowstrings.

While all of my bow wielding characters do carry spare bow strings, it due more to my being attentive to detail and realism vs. the off chance that my string is somehow cut. Also, I can assure you that a bow is normally carried strung if there's even a remote chance that one will have to use it. Stringing a bow is not such a simple task that you would perform this after combat begins.

-Kurocyn

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

I really hope you're not suggesting that a taut string is harder to cut then a loose one laying on the ground...and somehow you're mistaking a hilt as something 'detachable on demand', instead of 'replaceable by a skilled craftsman with a lot of time and work.'

As for slugfests, if you read the Drizz't duels, they're all about movement, footwork, and correct placement of blows...they aren't about sitting in place and slugging one another. Since there are no parries in standard D@D at ANY level of the game, none of the duels that Drizz't fights are even possible...ingame, he would have hit Entreri with EVERY SINGLE SWING, and Entreri would have hit him. Drizz't had, what, a 24 AC? 20th level fighter? Specialized, finesse with a 20 dex, +3 to +5 weapon, and no penalties for dual wielding in earlier versions of the game?

He couldn't miss.

And also note that Drizzt wears his bracers of speed on his feet, not his hands. Because footwork and mobility is important.

Authorial characters can do all sorts of stuff game characters can't.

==Aelryinth

Just when you thought things couldn't get any crazier.....


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Are you guys still discussing about "sundering the +0 bowstring"?
Are you serious?


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:
Heck, look at that recent storyline on the Paizo blog. Sneaks into camp, leaves them the bows...destroys the bowstrings...

&

Aelryinth wrote:
Authorial characters can do all sorts of stuff game characters can't.

You just proved everyones point in your own posts...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Spring attackng Crane Duelist meets Pouncing barbarian...

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Skull wrote:
Fozbek wrote:
Christopher Van Horn wrote:
What about simply feinting in combat to flat foot your opponent. wouldn't that negate crane style? I don't have the book in front of me right now but almost all the style feats have the "you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed caveat"
A successful feint does not make the target flat-footed, it denies them their Dexterity bonus to AC. The two are similar but different.
Isnt that pretty much flat? Also when dex AC is denied. So is dodge, which fighting defensively gives you.

No, the flat-footed condition makes it impossible for you to make attacks of opportunity (unless you have Combat Reflexes), in addition to losing Dex+Dodge bonuses to AC.

(This is why the Rogue's Uncanny Dodge ability is much more powerful in Pathfinder than in 3.5; the 3.5 version of the ability specified that you just don't lose your Dex to AC when flat-footed--in the Pathfinder wording, Rogues are now immune to flat-footedness entirely and ergo don't need Combat Reflexes to AOO, which improves their chances of making a sneak attack in the first round.)

The idea of "Dexless-AC" gets conflated with the flat-footed condition because you are most OFTEN denied your Dex to AC when flat-footed, and because of that, your Dexless-AC is called your Flat-Footed AC. It IS very confusing, and Paizo could do us all a huge favor by coming up with a new term for Flat-Footed AC, because everyone (including myself) forgets at some point the difference. Call it, idk, "Clumsy AC" or "Unguarded AC" or something.

Sorry for going slightly OT, but I hope the clarification is useful.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DeathQuaker wrote:


Sorry for going slightly OT, but I hope the clarification is useful.

This thread still had a topic?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Bobson wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:


Sorry for going slightly OT, but I hope the clarification is useful.
This thread still had a topic?

Maybe it has some strings attached...

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

Lokius wrote:

I was unaware you could do a called shot to a bow string as part of a sunder. As far as I am aware attempting to sunder targets an item held or worn. The bowstring is a small part of a bow, there are no rules for called shots for 'parts' of weapons. Hence the sunder must be against the main part of the weapon (the bow).

If you want to house rule it otherwise I suggest increasing the AC of the bowstring massively as it is protect by the bow and usually the arms of the weilder. I was suggest increasing the bowstring's AC by 8. It is only a move action to restring a bow anyway or free is you have quick draw as bows are not kept strung so the assumption is you string the bow as you draw it. Of course you have to have spare bowstrings.

Actually the string would be as easy to hit as the bow itself, as far as size goes. It's a three foot long taut piece of string...it's VERY easy to hit. The wood of a bow can at least partially deflect a blow.

And sunder doesn't hit the MAIN part of an item, it hits the WEAKEST part of an item. Go look at an axe...the sunder attempt is against the wooden haft. Sunder a medallion on someone...you are more likely to cut the chain holding it on then the medallion itself, and telling me you can't aim for the chain is just foolish. Chain gauntlet...the gauntlet is the main part, but the chain is the weakest part.

Ditto with a bow. The weakest part of the bow is actually the string. If you just want to make it useless, you'd cut the weakest part. if you want to destroy it, sure, you'd cut the wood.

-------
The Pouncing Barbarian has the only melee resort to the Crane technique, as I noted before...the ability to move and make a full attack, effectively 'outrunning' the ability to deflect. Such a duel would be far more even, unless a spring attacking Crane duelist had some cover from straight-line charges (such as being able to move behind cover or difficult terrain to stop a charge).

The only other alternative is the Robilar's Gambit tactic, where you get AoO's when others attack you, which just gets you back to less then par (The Crane gets a normal attack plus an AoO).

But good luck getting a Vital Strike off on this technique!

It's not that I don't like the technique, as a tactic it's great...it's just got no counter that I can see in melee.

===Aelryinth


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

That still does not make the bowstring any easier to sunder than the bow. By your own words, sundering a bow and sundering a bowstring are the same thing, and the sunder attempt therefore faces the same AC, hardness, and hit points, including the bonuses for magical enhancement.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Tranglefoot bag, sovereign glue and caltrops can also sour tactics requiring running around.


Put him up against a retarius.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:
It's not that I don't like the technique, as a tactic it's great...it's just got no counter that I can see in melee.

The counter is: "I stand there using total defense and laugh at the series of whiffs. When I get bored, I'll start readying trip attacks while fighting defensively for when they are in reach."

The alternative counter is simply to run. Because a regular person (30' move speed) running (x4 speed) can move 120' a turn without magical assistance. Even in heavy armor, they can still move 90', and even if they have a 20' move speed (and no heavy armor) they can move 80'. A 20th level monk can only travel 90' without magical assistance so only has a spring attack range of 80' (reserving 10' to get out of 5' stepping range after the attack). So anyone except a halfling or gnome in heavy armor can stay out of the monk's spring attack range.

Either solution leads to a stalemate.


DeathQuaker wrote:
Skull wrote:
Fozbek wrote:
Christopher Van Horn wrote:
What about simply feinting in combat to flat foot your opponent. wouldn't that negate crane style? I don't have the book in front of me right now but almost all the style feats have the "you must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed caveat"
A successful feint does not make the target flat-footed, it denies them their Dexterity bonus to AC. The two are similar but different.
Isnt that pretty much flat? Also when dex AC is denied. So is dodge, which fighting defensively gives you.

No, the flat-footed condition makes it impossible for you to make attacks of opportunity (unless you have Combat Reflexes), in addition to losing Dex+Dodge bonuses to AC.

(This is why the Rogue's Uncanny Dodge ability is much more powerful in Pathfinder than in 3.5; the 3.5 version of the ability specified that you just don't lose your Dex to AC when flat-footed--in the Pathfinder wording, Rogues are now immune to flat-footedness entirely and ergo don't need Combat Reflexes to AOO, which improves their chances of making a sneak attack in the first round.)

The idea of "Dexless-AC" gets conflated with the flat-footed condition because you are most OFTEN denied your Dex to AC when flat-footed, and because of that, your Dexless-AC is called your Flat-Footed AC. It IS very confusing, and Paizo could do us all a huge favor by coming up with a new term for Flat-Footed AC, because everyone (including myself) forgets at some point the difference. Call it, idk, "Clumsy AC" or "Unguarded AC" or something.

Sorry for going slightly OT, but I hope the clarification is useful.

Hmm, my wording might have been a bit wrong there. I was simply referring to the AC entry on your character sheet for flat-footed. But yes, there is a big difference between being flat-footed and flat-footed AC.

Sadly its the best name for that AC. Best alternative I can come up with quickly is "surprise AC".

51 to 100 of 300 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Ah, Crane Technique All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.