|
Well, it works like a charm for me. I didn't want it to be as powerful as Math says, so, it only adds the natural attacks as secondary attacks to the FoB. So, it's cool.
This is what your interpretation does to natural attacks (note: the only thing not PFS legal is INA, well, that and the level).
Human Summoner (Synthesist) 9/ Monk 11
--------------------
DEFENSE
--------------------
AC 29, touch 19, flat-footed 26 (+2 Dex, +5 Wis, +8 NA, -1 size, +2 monk, +1 dodge +2 shield)
hp 213 (40 summoner, 58 eidolon, 55 monk, 60 con)
Fort +15, Ref +14, Will +20
--------------------
OFFENSE
--------------------
FoB: +24/+24/+19/+19/+14/+9 (2d8) +9
Claws(x4): +16 (3d8) +4
Whilrwind(claw)(all within 10') +23 (3d8) +13
--------------------
STATISTICS
--------------------
Str 28(10), Dex 15(10), Con 17(10), Int 14, Wis 20(16+4), Cha (14+1)
Base Atk +15 (FoB +18); CMB +28; CMD 31
Feats: Weapon Focus(claws)-1, Feral Combat-1, Power Attack-3, Multiattack-5, Improved Natural Weapon-5, Eldritch Claws-7,
. . Multiattack-9, Dimensional Agility-9, Improved Unarmed Strike-10, Stunning Blow-10, Combat Expertise-10, Arcane Strike-10,
. . dodge-11, Blind Fight-11, Deflect Arrows-13, combat reflexes-13, Improved Trip-15, Dimensional Assault-15,
. . Dimensional Dervish-17, Mobility-17, Spring Attack-19, Whirlwind Attack-19
--------------------
Evolutions
--------------------
Quadraped: Limbs(legs)x2, bite, claws(legs), improved damage(claws), pounce, limbs(arms), claws(arms), large, ability increase(str)
. . reach(claws)
Stats are while naked and unbuffed.
|
|
1. Straight monk won't have the natural attacks.
2. That build, using my interpretation of the rule would be substantially less powerful, having to choose between the 5 natural attacks (claw x4 1d10 +9, bite 1d8 +9 ) or FoB ( 6 iterative, 2d8 +9) or whirlwind (10' AoE, 1d10 +13). Not a high dps build compared to what can done with other, less controversial, classes. It's primary advantages would be high survivability and extreme mobility. Both dps and survivability could be increased by going synthesist 19 / monk 1.
3. Under my interpretation (FoB using a natural weapon) I would drop my strength increase, move reach to my bite, and purchase trip. 6 iterative attacks for 1d8 +8, with a free trip attempt on each blow that hits. I'm sacrificing 1d8 damage on each of my attacks for the trip opportunity. All of my attacks would suffer from the -1 str.
4. One of arguments was needing GM permission. If I drop INA, which is generally accepted everywhere else, I can bring a character built along this path to a PFS table.
5. If we're going to start excluding otherwise legal build options based on opinions of relative power levels, we're going to have to exclude the Magus, half the barbarian archetypes, wizards, anything that splashes 1 level of oracle, and anything that includes a 2 level splash in alchemist for mutagen + vestigial arm.
|
be advised that you're likely to be eventually shot down if you just try to sneak Improved Natural Attack into your build without having permission ahead of time.Or... you just play a natural weapon ranger and just TAKE the Improved Natural Attacks anyway since the Archetype grants em to you.
That's acceptable (e.g., in PFS, for instance) -- and the fact that INA is granted to that one particular archetype, and nowhere else, should clue you in that monster feats are otherwise usually not available to PCs and their animal/outsider side-kicks.
Well, it works like a charm for me. I didn't want it to be as powerful as Math says, so, it only adds the natural attacks as secondary attacks to the FoB. So, it's cool.This is what your interpretation does to natural attacks (note: the only thing not PFS legal is INA, well, that and the level).
** spoiler omitted **
Stats are while naked and unbuffed.
Nice build. Don't see how you are able to get Weapon Focus and Feral combat training at first level. Cause, you can't.
|
|
Nice build. Don't see how you are able to get Weapon Focus and Feral combat training at first level. Cause, you can't.
The synthesist has a BAB of 1 while fused at first level. If that is a point of contention, the feats could easily be shifted around, taking arcane strike and combat reflexes at level 1 and shuffling everything else down the line.
The end result remains the same.
Not a build I would personally use though. It has a huge insta-death flaw.
|
Nice build. Don't see how you are able to get Weapon Focus and Feral combat training at first level. Cause, you can't.The synthesist has a BAB of 1 while fused at first level. If that is a point of contention, the feats could easily be shifted around, taking arcane strike and combat reflexes at level 1 and shuffling everything else down the line.
The end result remains the same.
Not a build I would personally use though. It has a huge insta-death flaw.
No, the flaw is you don't have Improved Unarmed Strike until 10th level, then you don't meet the pre-req for the feat in question and the whole build instantly falls apart.
|
|
No, the flaw is you don't have Improved Unarmed Strike until 10th level, then you don't meet the pre-req for the feat in question and the whole build instantly falls apart.
Ahh, understood: In that case, just swap the arcane strike and feral combat feats. Feral combat was pointless before that time anyways.
Male Human Summoner (Synthesist) 9/ Monk 11
--------------------
DEFENSE
--------------------
AC 29, touch 19, flat-footed 26 (+2 Dex, +5 Wis, +8 NA, -1 size, +2 monk, +1 dodge +2 shield)
hp 213 (40 summoner, 58 eidolon, 55 monk, 60 con)
Fort +15, Ref +14, Will +20
--------------------
OFFENSE
--------------------
FoB: +24/+24/+19/+19/+14/+9 (1d10) +9
Claws(x4): +16 (2d8) +4
Whilrwind(claw)(all within 10') +23 (2d8) +13
--------------------
STATISTICS
--------------------
Str 28(10), Dex 15(10), Con 17(10), Int 14, Wis 20(16+4), Cha (14+1)
Base Atk +15 (FoB +18); CMB +28; CMD 31
Feats: Weapon Focus(claws)-1, Arcane Strike-1, Power Attack-3, Improved Natural Weapon-5, Eldritch Claws-7, Multiattack-9, Dimensional Agility-9, Improved Unarmed Strike-10, Stunning Blow-10, Combat Expertise-10, Feral Combat-10, dodge-11, Blind Fight-11, Deflect Arrows-13, combat reflexes-13, Improved Trip-15, Dimensional Assault-15, Dimensional Dervish-17, Mobility-17, Spring Attack-19, Whirlwind Attack-19
--------------------
Evolutions
--------------------
Quadraped: Limbs(legs)x2, bite, claws(legs), improved damage(claws), pounce, limbs(arms), claws(arms), large, ability increase(str)
. . reach(claws)
I made a mistake on feat placement, but correcting that mistake hardly causes the build to fall apart. There was simply no point in taking feral combat before I picked up monk.
|
|
1. Straight monk won't have the natural attacks.
Well... yes and no... depends on what you want to do. A straight monk could pick up the two-weapon fighting chain, effectively allowing him to make all his attacks with his knees, get all the attacks he would by flurrying, add in all his natural attacks, and then start adding other feats into it.
Of course, now you have to deal with the dex requirements for the feat chain.
adopted trait + tusked grabs you a bite attack, while skill focus perception + eldritch heritage can nab you two claw attacks (of limited duration). This eats up a lot of feats though, and is more viable in a game where the feat/flaw system is being used.
The other side is that the synthesist can take the twf feats and the above feats as well, but will run into trouble with the maximum number of attacks they can make :/
1. Straight monk won't have the natural attacks.
Well... yes and no... depends on what you want to do. A straight monk could pick up the two-weapon fighting chain, effectively allowing him to make all his attacks with his knees, get all the attacks he would by flurrying, add in all his natural attacks, and then start adding other feats into it.
Of course, now you have to deal with the dex requirements for the feat chain.
adopted trait + tusked grabs you a bite attack, while skill focus perception + eldritch heritage can nab you two claw attacks (of limited duration). This eats up a lot of feats though, and is more viable in a game where the feat/flaw system is being used.
The other side is that the synthesist can take the twf feats and the above feats as well, but will run into trouble with the maximum number of attacks they can make :/
Monks can't get TWF feats and add them to flurry.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. Straight monk won't have the natural attacks.Well... yes and no... depends on what you want to do. A straight monk could pick up the two-weapon fighting chain, effectively allowing him to make all his attacks with his knees, get all the attacks he would by flurrying, add in all his natural attacks...
Wrong.
Flurry: you get X number of attacks dependent upon monk level, all attacks restricted to unarmed strikes and monk weapons. TWF: you get one more attack; all attacks -2. Feral Combat Training: one type of natural weapon you have Weapon Focus in may be used while flurrying (the word "attack" appears nowhere in the text of the feat).
So, a 3rd-level barbarian[beast totem]2/monk[martial artist]1 with TWF, WF:Claws, and Feral Combat Training does not get six attacks. He gets, at most, four, by not flurrying:
* non-Flurry Unarmed Strike (right foot kick ~ 1x dmg) + 2 hand claws (beast totem lesser) + TWF (left foot kick ~ .5x dmg) = 4 attacks.
-- If he Flurried, he'd get two attacks as his Flurry of Blows full attack action -- because that's all he gets from monk1. (+1 more from TWF if the GM lets you stack those.)
IOW: you're usually better off not flurrying if you have "gain"ed natural weapons. (The real reason for Feral Combat Training is to permit you to substitute a weaker type of weapon for a massively powerful natural weapon -- such as a huge 4d8 bite attack when wildshapped or polymorphed into a giant monster, etc.)
IOW: you're usually better off not flurrying if you have "gain"ed natural weapons. (The real reason for Feral Combat Training is to permit you to substitute a weaker type of weapon for a massively powerful natural weapon -- such as a huge 4d8 bite attack when wildshapped or polymorphed into a giant monster, etc.)
When you put it that way, letting you use an overpowered polymorphed bite as part of the flurry instead of in addition to could be a hugely deadly ability.
IOW: you're usually better off not flurrying if you have "gain"ed natural weapons. (The real reason for Feral Combat Training is to permit you to substitute a weaker type of weapon for a massively powerful natural weapon -- such as a huge 4d8 bite attack when wildshapped or polymorphed into a giant monster, etc.)When you put it that way, letting you use an overpowered polymorphed bite as part of the flurry instead of in addition to could be a hugely deadly ability.
Except that if u DO have flury and are polymorphed into something THAT size, your unnarmed attack will deal MORE damage then said bite.
A straight monk could pick up the two-weapon fighting chain, effectively allowing him to make all his attacks with his knees, get all the attacks he would by flurrying, add in all his natural attacks, and then start adding other feats into it.
A monk using the TWF chain instead of flurry will not get increased BAB, which can lead to fewer knee attacks at certain levels. Also he will not get full Strength bonus to all attacks, or be able to exchange attacks for sunder CMs. That may or may not be worth giving up in exchange for making natural attacks, depending on the monk. (Maybe he wants to wear armor?)
|
|
Well... yes and no... depends on what you want to do. A straight monk could pick up the two-weapon fighting chain, effectively allowing him to make all his attacks with his knees, get all the attacks he would by flurrying, add in all his natural attacks...
What you not looking at is this: Monks are already using the TWF chain. It's stated as such right in the description of FoB. The monk attack progression is nothing more than standard iterative advancement + TWF chain advancement. A TWF fighter or ranger has the exact same progression (except they will access the feats earlier).
The advantages of FoB is not additional attacks. It's full BAB + full Strength + increased damage die + the usage of feats you've not actually acquired.
You can't double dip on TWF. It is already a part of your FoB.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm posting as I posted in another thread.
Now, the monk text says:
" A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks."
The Feral Combat training states:
"Special: If you are a monk, you can use the selected natural weapon with your flurry of blows class feature."
I believe the main problem with the interpretation of said feat is the bolded word "WITH".
My believe is that it works in both monk stances, cause on both sentences in the monk entry it states "...such weapons as part of a flurry of blows" and "...attacks in addition to his flurry of blows".
Now, in no part of that sentences the word WITH is used, and this leads me to believe that the word WITH stated in the feat description allows you to use both stances, that is to totally eliminate that part of the monk flurry of blows entry.
I think it's reasonable to assume that.
|
|
No, my post is correct, though apparently I used terrible wording.
I never said you could Flurry and twf and use natural attacks.
What I intended to be understood was that a monk who took the twf feats could use them to get the same number of attacks as a flurrying monk. And then that same monk who is using the twf chain could add in the natural attacks to the attacks from two weapon fighting. Without flurrying, but still benefiting from the same number of attacks.
So, monk flurries, can't use twf or natural attacks
Monk uses twf, can add in natural attacks, doesn't flurry but because of the twf chain has the same attacks from twf as the flurrying monk has from flurrying.
Hope that makes more sense than the previous post :p
|
|
So, monk flurries, can't use twf or natural attacksMonk uses twf, can add in natural attacks, doesn't flurry but because of the twf chain has the same attacks from twf as the flurrying monk has from flurrying.
Hope that makes more sense than the previous post :p
This I can agree with. It holds true for any character, monk or not. Of course, your natural attacks will be counted as secondary at that point.
I still can't understand why people want to nerf this so bad.
Starting with that there is no logical reason why a monk shouldn't be able to use Flurry with Natural attacks.
I understand they changed it from a balance standpoint. Making a feat that superceds this limitation is not a big problem.
I'm posting as I posted in another thread.
Now, the monk text says:
" A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks."The Feral Combat training states:
"Special: If you are a monk, you can use the selected natural weapon with your flurry of blows class feature."I believe the main problem with the interpretation of said feat is the bolded word "WITH".
My believe is that it works in both monk stances, cause on both sentences in the monk entry it states "...such weapons as part of a flurry of blows" and "...attacks in addition to his flurry of blows".
Now, in no part of that sentences the word WITH is used, and this leads me to believe that the word WITH stated in the feat description allows you to use both stances, that is to totally eliminate that part of the monk flurry of blows entry.
I think it's reasonable to assume that.
This is how I see it too. Monk has rule saying you can not use natural attacks with a flurry but the feat Feral Combat allows this now. So remove the restriction and use natural attacks with a weapons/unarmed strikes as written in the combat section of the core rule book. Simple as that. So you can use your bite to attack with the flurry or add a bite attack in addition to the flurry. No different that any other class using TWF and weapons/Unarmed attacks who can already do this with out the Feral Combat feat.
What I intended to be understood was that a monk who took the twf feats could use them to get the same number of attacks as a flurrying monk.
Only at certain levels. (Specifically: 1-5, 8-10, & 15)
At other levels, a monk using flurry will have one more attack than a monk using the TWF chain. (6, 7, 11-14, 16-20)
So the ability to make your natural attacks (as secondary) may make up for losing an attack at some levels, but you also need to consider losing the BAB, full Str to hit, and sunder-swapping. It's an option, for sure, but most of the time, probably not a very good one.
What I intended to be understood was that a monk who took the twf feats could use them to get the same number of attacks as a flurrying monk.Only at certain levels. (Specifically: 1-5, 8-10, & 15)
At other levels, a monk using flurry will have one more attack than a monk using the TWF chain. (6, 7, 11-14, 16-20)
So the ability to make your natural attacks (as secondary) may make up for losing an attack at some levels, but you also need to consider losing the BAB, full Str to hit, and sunder-swapping. It's an option, for sure, but most of the time, probably not a very good one.
I don't see how a monk using flurry would get more attacks then a TWF one.
Sunder can already be swaped by anyone, it's not a standard action to sunder, it's in the place of an attack.
I don't see how a monk using flurry would get more attacks then a TWF one.
A level 6 monk gets three attacks while Flurrying, but two attacks using TWF.
A level 11 monk gets five attacks while Flurrying, but four attacks using ITWF.
A level 16 monk gets seven attacks while Flurrying, but six attacks using GTWF.
Flurry increases the monks BAB, which leads to more iterative attacks at certain levels. When using the TWF chain, his BAB is lower, so he will get fewer iterative attacks
Sunder can already be swaped by anyone, it's not a standard action to sunder, it's in the place of an attack.
It's in place of an attack as part of an attack action. An attack action is a standard action.
Sunder: "You can attempt to sunder an item held or worn by your opponent as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack."
It does not say "OR in place of a melee attack."
Sunder: "You can attempt to sunder an item held or worn by your opponent as part of an attack action in place of a melee attack."
It does not say "OR in place of a melee attack."
Bolded the relevant part. It was a mistake to put the "as part of an attack action"
As you may well see ALL maneuvers require either a Standard action or are made in place of a melee attack. This one falls on the second category. But the text is confusing if you don't read it in full.
But the text is confusing if you don't read it in full.
You can't just ignore the six words before your bold.
It's not a matter of reading the text in full, it's a matter of not selectively removing text that's made it through four printings of the book because you think it was 'a mistake.'
When they errata it, or FAQ it, or blog it saying it's wrong, then it'll be wrong. In the meantime, it's a rule, and changing it is a house rule.
(And, for the record, I do think they will eventually errata it, hopefully along with everything else involving the attack action, as that seems to be one of the biggest problems people run into with PFRPG, along with combat maneuvers and TWF.)
But the text is confusing if you don't read it in full.You can't just ignore the six words before your bold.
It's not a matter of reading the text in full, it's a matter of not selectively removing text that's made it through four printings of the book because you think it was 'a mistake.'
When they errata it, or FAQ it, or blog it saying it's wrong, then it'll be wrong. In the meantime, it's a rule, and changing it is a house rule.
(And, for the record, I do think they will eventually errata it, hopefully along with everything else involving the attack action, as that seems to be one of the biggest problems people run into with PFRPG, along with combat maneuvers and TWF.)
Ok mate. I'm not ignoring it. What I'm saying is, it' either an attack action OR in place of a melee attack, it cannot be both. Your argument for it being an attack action is that it's the first thing writen on the text? I don't think so.
Evidence states that no other combat maneuver, not even the new ones, I might add, works like this. So, to me is clear, and I remember it being discussed before, that it is in place of a melee attack.
In this case, the rules don't 'clearly' prove your point. And I'm sure I'm not alone in this.
And I agree that "attack action" sucks.
But the text is confusing if you don't read it in full.You can't just ignore the six words before your bold.
It's not a matter of reading the text in full, it's a matter of not selectively removing text that's made it through four printings of the book because you think it was 'a mistake.'
When they errata it, or FAQ it, or blog it saying it's wrong, then it'll be wrong. In the meantime, it's a rule, and changing it is a house rule.
(And, for the record, I do think they will eventually errata it, hopefully along with everything else involving the attack action, as that seems to be one of the biggest problems people run into with PFRPG, along with combat maneuvers and TWF.)
Ok mate. I'm not ignoring it. What I'm saying is, it' either an attack action OR in place of a melee attack, it cannot be both. Your argument for it being an attack action is that it's the first thing writen on the text? I don't think so.
Evidence states that no other combat maneuver, not even the new ones, I might add, works like this. So, to me is clear, and I remember it being discussed before, that it is in place of a melee attack.
In this case, the rules don't 'clearly' prove your point. And I'm sure I'm not alone in this.
And I agree that "attack action" sucks.
An Attack Action is a type of standard action. A Melee Attack is type of Attack Action.
So since Melee Attack is an Attack Action and ab Attack Action is Standard Action then Grick is right here.
Seems kind of redundant to say Sunder work with Attack Action and melee actions. Sounds like copy and pasted the line into the maneuvers but added attack action so you could sunder with the other attack actions like Natural Attack.
But the text is confusing if you don't read it in full.You can't just ignore the six words before your bold.
It's not a matter of reading the text in full, it's a matter of not selectively removing text that's made it through four printings of the book because you think it was 'a mistake.'
When they errata it, or FAQ it, or blog it saying it's wrong, then it'll be wrong. In the meantime, it's a rule, and changing it is a house rule.
(And, for the record, I do think they will eventually errata it, hopefully along with everything else involving the attack action, as that seems to be one of the biggest problems people run into with PFRPG, along with combat maneuvers and TWF.)
Ok mate. I'm not ignoring it. What I'm saying is, it' either an attack action OR in place of a melee attack, it cannot be both. Your argument for it being an attack action is that it's the first thing writen on the text? I don't think so.
Evidence states that no other combat maneuver, not even the new ones, I might add, works like this. So, to me is clear, and I remember it being discussed before, that it is in place of a melee attack.
In this case, the rules don't 'clearly' prove your point. And I'm sure I'm not alone in this.
And I agree that "attack action" sucks.
An Attack Action is a type of standard action. A Melee Attack is type of Attack Action.
So since Melee Attack is an Attack Action and ab Attack Action is Standard Action then Grick is right here.
Seems kind of redundant to say Sunder work with Attack Action and melee actions. Sounds like copy and pasted the line into the maneuvers but added attack action so you could sunder with the other attack actions like Natural Attack.
An Attack action is a WEIRD action, nothing states exactly what it is.
The MAJOR evidence to look here are ALL other combat maneuvers, why would sunder be the ONLY ONE diferent?
Aside from the fact that sunder is already dificult to pull off, you guys are nerfing it more by not looking at evidence.
I've seen discussion about sunder before, and the concensus is that it's "in place of a melee attack", as trip and disarm (which is the closest maneuver to sunder)
You may disagree, but it's unbalancing if you do, and you should open another topic for this.
BTW "So since Melee Attack is an Attack Action and an Attack Action is Standard Action then Grick is right here. "
This line that you wrote states that any attack is an standard action, so, no full-attack. Of course, that's not what you meant, but it doesn't work the way you meant, or the way you think it does.
There are 14 FAQ's on the Sunder Thread earlier this year, so please stop by and FAQ it if you would like it fixed.
There are 14 FAQ's on the Sunder Thread earlier this year, so please stop by and FAQ it if you would like it fixed.
Thanks, will do so to help.
But there is no doubt in my mind whatsoever how it works. Specially cause it's a remnant of previous editions.
|
|
Which is fine, but that does make it a house rule. Since as worded... ect, ect, ect.
Now, I agree, going straight monk and grabbing all the twf feats to make up for it will likely be a suboptimal option. I was just pointing out that it was a possible venue to nab natural attacks.
But a dip into monk can be far more interesting to stacking natural attacks.
Say... monk 4, fighter 6, ninja 10?
Dex based, two weapon fighting with unarmed strikes from the knees, sap adept and sap master for extra damage from sa, weapon training for unarmed attacks, monastic training to add half your non-monk levels to your unarmed damage dice, adopted and tusked trait for a bite attack, reactionary and improved init to go first, skill focus and eldritch heritage to grab two claw attacks...
Of course, you're looking at using an amulet of mighty fists here, or enchanting your body with a high level gwm and permanency :/ And you don't get a lot of spare feats. But with ninja you can pick up the greater invisibility. And you get just enough bab to nab that 4th attack at 20th. You can pick up the adder feat and add poison to your bludgeoning fun.
Or, and I don't know how legal this is, but you can pick up monastic training, and unarmed combat mastery. This would give you monk 4 for unarmed, then unarmed combat mastery would bump it up to effectively monk 10, and then monastic training as worded appears to give you 1/2 your non-monk levels to unarmed, so that would bounce you to monk 18. a monks robe away from the 2d10 damage. Of course it is a lot of investment just to go up to 2d10 :p
Then, you're dealing 4 primary, three secondary, one ki point worth *or haste*, and three natural attacks worth *bite, claw, claw* of attacks with anywhere from 10d6 to potentially 20d6 *on the bldging attacks* sneak attack damage.
Anyways, lots of potential fun to be had.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I still can't understand why people want to nerf this so bad.
Let's test a build in which flurry and totem stack:
01 barb1 Extra Rage, Power Attack
02 barb2 [beast totem:lesser]
03 monk1 [martial artist][Improved Grapple], Weapon Focus:Claw
04 monk2 STR>(bump),[Deflect Arrows],(buy Furious Amulet of Mighty Fists),
05 monk3 [pain points], Feral Combat Training, (buy Belt STR+2)
5th-level tactics: drink always-held-in-hand potion of Enlarge Person in surprise round; let enemies advance (hopefully several will adjacent or nearly so).
STR: assume starting score of 19 and advanced to 20 at 4th, rage to 24, size and belt bring to 28.
Attacks: unarmed strike Flurry: 2x primary + two claw: 2x secondary
US bonus: 3(FLAB)+7(STR)-1(size)+2(Furious)-2(Power Attack) = +9/+9;
claw bonus: -5(secondary)+1(Weapon Focus) = +5/+5; dmg: d8+9
Damage: d8+7(STR)+2(Furious)+4(Power Attack) = ~ 4x(17.5)
2d6+10+1+6
...on paper that looks mediocre: capacity for damage is sick, but ability to hit with secondaries isn't.
However, any single event granting you an attack bonus advantage (elevation, foe tripped, grappled, denied DEX, armor sundered, etc) applies to all of your attacks, potentially permitting 70 average non-crit damage at 5th level -- if any two of the four attacks connect, you will insta-drop 100% of level-appropriate mooks and 50% of bosses.
Worse cheese: claims the claws are on your feet, and flurry with a 2d6 (Enlarged) +1 temple sword held in both hands to 1.5x both STR and PA -- pushing average all-four-hit damage to 83.
-- Note that this works just as well by taking two monk levels first, then switching away from lawful alignment (so it's not like you need Ultimate Combat or other splat to pull it off).
(Intra-party cheese: paladin ally trains his horse to do nothing but Improved Trip with its three attacks, then lets the feral cheesemonkbarian ride it; everybody in the party starts tripping things and throwing nets, etx. GM finally has enough; next encounter features chedder-lovin' jabberwocks.)
So, yeeeeah....do we really want this at 5th level in Pathfinder?
But
wait!
We are
not done
yet...
-- We have only begun to wring the Limburger....
(Main thread.) max(DEX)/min(STR)
01 barb1 [urban][controlled rage][crowd control] Weapon Finesse
02 barb2 [beast totem:lesser]
03 fight1 [unarmed] Dragon Style, IUS, Monk/Exotic Weapon Proficiency (all), Two Weapon Fighting
(....kill some rich guy, spend 5,000gp on Agile Amulet of Mighty Fists)
Yup: five attacks as early as third-level and no messing around with flurry or Feral Combat Training.
Attack-sequence: hanbo (trip!) --> hanbo (2nd trip attempt) or Dragon Style elbow (d4+1.5DEX) --> 2x toe claws (d4+DEX) --> bite (d3+DEX) ...with the last four attacks versus a prone target. (Since Orcling Oscar has a ridiculous armor class from [Controlled Rage:DEX], he doesn't mind taking opps by tripping without ImpTrip.)
04 alchemist (...of course you know where this is going...), DEX>(el stupido)
05 makeitstopalready ... Piranha Strike
I still can't understand why people want to nerf this so bad.Let's test a build in which flurry and totem stack:
01 barb1 Extra Rage, Power Attack
02 barb2 [beast totem:lesser]
03 monk1 [martial artist][Improved Grapple], Weapon Focus:Claw
04 monk2 STR>(bump),[Deflect Arrows],(buy Furious Amulet of Mighty Fists),
05 monk3 [pain points], Feral Combat Training, (buy Belt STR+2)5th-level tactics: drink always-held-in-hand potion of Enlarge Person in surprise round; let enemies advance (hopefully several will adjacent or nearly so).
STR: assume starting score of 19 and advanced to 20 at 4th, rage to 24, size and belt bring to 28.
Attacks: unarmed strike Flurry: 2x primary + two claw: 2x secondary
US bonus: 3(FLAB)+7(STR)-1(size)+2(Furious)-2(Power Attack) = +9/+9;
claw bonus: -5(secondary)+1(Weapon Focus) = +5/+5; dmg: d8+9
Damage: d8+7(STR)+2(Furious)+4(Power Attack) = ~ 4x(17.5)
2d6+10+1+6...on paper that looks mediocre: capacity for damage is sick, but ability to hit with secondaries isn't.
However, any single event granting you an attack bonus advantage (elevation, foe tripped, grappled, denied DEX, armor sundered, etc) applies to all of your attacks, potentially permitting 70 average non-crit damage at 5th level -- if any two of the four attacks connect, you will insta-drop 100% of level-appropriate mooks and 50% of bosses.
Worse cheese: claims the claws are on your feet, and flurry with a 2d6 (Enlarged) +1 temple sword held in both hands to 1.5x both STR and PA -- pushing average all-four-hit damage to 83.
-- Note that this works just as well by taking two monk levels first, then switching away from lawful alignment (so it's not like you need Ultimate Combat or other splat to pull it off).
(Intra-party cheese: paladin ally trains his horse to do nothing but Improved Trip with its three attacks, then lets the feral cheesemonkbarian ride it; everybody in the party starts tripping things and throwing nets, etx. GM finally...
Thank you! I loved that you did this yourself. You just proved that Feral Combat training is nothing serious.
It looks mediocre because it IS mediocre. The things you stated as 'cheese' (cause they are) can be done with any character of any class, with any feat chain.
The Orcling Oscar is better then the character you made, and he doesn't even have Feral Combat training.... now, explain to me how does that post you made prove in anyway that FCT is OP!? It proves just the oposite, so, again, Thanks.
EDIT: Of course, Orcling Oscar is totally wrong and doesn't work at all, but ok.
Now, just for fun.
01 barb1 Imp. Unnarmed, 2-Weapon Fighting
02 barb2 [beast totem:lesser]
03 barb3 Dragon Style
04 barb4 STR>(bump),[Animal Fury](buy Furious Amulet of Mighty Fists),
05 barb5 Dragon Ferocity
Ok, I’ll go with the same Abilities and potion u did.
Attacks: unarmed strike Flurry: 2x primary + two claw + 1 Bite: 3x secondary
US bonus: 3(FLAB)+7(STR)-1(size)+2(Furious) = +11/+11;
Claw bonus: -5(secondary) = +7/+7; Bite: -5(secondary)= +7
Damage: (Unarmed) 1d4+15/1d4+12 = 17.5+14.5
Claws:1d8+5/1d8+5 = 2x 9.5
Bite:1d6+5 = 8.5
Now, that’s 10 points less then your average.
But I'll hit, and I’m not using power attack, it get bonkers when you start leveling and extra attacks, mighty rage and pounce start doing their jobs WAY sooner then your build there.
And when I get power attack too.
Ah, bear in mind that I’m making 4 attacks at level TWO. Not losing anything for multi classing and all that, that’s just ONE build possible I can make it WAY better then it is now, that's just joking around, tell me again why FCT is so UBER powerful?
You're gonna love this one
01 Fight1 (Unarmed)- [Imp. Unnarmed], Dragon Style, 2-Weapon Fighting, Power Attack
02 barb1 - Nada
03 barb2 [L. Beast totem], I don’t know… Imp. Initiative? Extra R. Power?
04 barb3 STR>(bump)(buy Furious Amulet of Mighty Fists)
05 barb4 [Animal Fury] Dragon Ferocity (Buy Belt)
Ok, I’ll go with the same Abilities and potion u did.
Attacks: unarmed strike Flurry: 2x primary + two claw + 1 Bite: 3x secondary
US bonus: 3(FLAB)+7(STR)-1(size)+2(Furious)-2(Power Attack) = +9/+9
Claw bonus: -5(secondary) -2(Power Attack) = +5/+5
Bite: -5(secondary) -2(Power Attack) = +5
Damage: (Unarmed) 1d4+19/1d4+14 = 21.5+16.5
Claws: 1d8+9/1d8+9 = 2x 13.5
Bite: 1d6+9 = 12.5
78.5 …
Hum... I'll hit as often as you, deal more damage, more attacks, more HP, wear armor without losing abilities, rage more ... Something must be wrong right?
Again, can you PROVE that FCT is broken? Cause u've been doing a poor job mate...
|
|
Well, it's all about the feat investment tradeoff really. For less min-maxed builds, I can see the broad interpretation of FCT adding in more overall damage.
However, the increase is minimal in most monk builds, unless you're taking advantage of spells and abilities that increase natural attacks *and thus unarmed strikes*.
To get the most mileage out of FCT, you want to have as many natural attacks as possible fall under the same type. Claws are good here, since they usually come in pairs. However, if you can't stack a bunch of modifiers onto your natural attacks, then you're not getting much mileage out of them.
Usually these modifiers mean that either you're bugging a teammate for them, or you're using wands *and the time to activate them as well*, and that goes a long way to offsetting the advantages.
Now, if you can start off with two racial claws, you could probably get a mild bump to dpr... plugging it into my old monk vs fighter dpr sheet, I get a difference for the level 5 monk of 32 dpr to 37 dpr, or about 14%. At level 20, the difference is even less significant. Then again, that monk build wasn't designed to be used with natural attacks. calcs below.
=(13.5*0.75)+((13.5*0.05)*0.75)+(13.5*0.75)+((13.5*0.05)*0.75)+(13.5*0.75)+ ((13.5*0.05)*0.75)+(5.5*0.45)+((5.5*0.05)*0.45)+(5.5*0.45)+((5.5*0.05)*0.45 )
The last two attacks are the double claw attacks.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again, can you PROVE that FCT is broken?
They're all effin' bonkers broken -- just because a particular exploit "has a little company" doesn't mean that can't be considered broken.
Presenting, for your edification, the most completely irresponsible build possible in Pathfinder -- and it's not even illegal in PFS yet!
STR+19 human 20pt
DEX:07
CON:16
INT:15
WIS:07
CHA:08
racial: Heart of the Fields
traits: Accelerated Drinker, Berserker of the Society
01 barb1 [wild rager] Power Attack, Raging Vitality
02 barb2 [wild fighting][Reckless Abandon]
03 alch1 [Ragechemist] Quick Draw
04 alch2 [Feral Mutagen], STR>20
05 figh1 [Unbreakable][Endurance][Die Hard] Weapon Focus:Greatsword
Equipment: Furious Amulet of Mighty Fists, +1 Greatsword, Belt of Giant Strength +2
Round 0: (always be holding potion of Enlarge Person in one hand and an alchemical strength extract in the other).
Round 1: move-action drink Enlarge Person potion; standard-action drink extract; Quick Draw greatsword. Hopefully a bunch of targets surround you.
Round 2: Rage; murderdeathkill.
Reach 10' and STR is 20+4(rage)+2(size)+2(belt)+6(feral) = 34; bonus +12
...pre-weapon attack bonuses: +4(BAB)+12(STR)+1(Reckless)-2(wild)-2(PA)-1(size) = +12; +1 (Weapon Focus: greatsword)
...weapon attack bonuses: +4(WF/+1/furious greatsword); +2-5=-2(furious natural);
Totals, Enlarged:
...2x +16 greatsword; 3d6+18(STRx1.5)+6(PAx3)+3(+1/furious) = ~37.5 each
...1x +10 bite: 1d8+12(STR)+4(PA)+2(furious) = ~22.5
...2x +10 claw: 2d6+12(STR)+4(PA)+2(furious) = ~25 each
Five hits average damage: 147.5
Exploits: has a de-facto "move" of 50' from round 1 to 2: 40' natural, Enlarge lets him "grow" in the direction he wants, and reach adds another 5'.
Irresponsibility: will insta-drop three-quarters of level-equivalent targets (monsters or allies) in one hit; must then make a will save to avoid frenzying -- a save that is nerfed by dumped WIS and exacerbated by the penalties Ragechemist piles on with cumulative -2s to will saves every round in which the character takes damage.
How do you make claw attacks with a greatsword in your hands?
|
|
They're toe claws, like a velociraptor's. Why? Because nothing says they have to sprout from your fingers (this is true of both Feral Mutagen and Beast Totem:Lesser). Is it smelly Limburger? Oh, yeah. Is it murder on your shoes? Yup.
More cheese: Feral Mutagen for bite + claws (toes), beast totem:lesser for claws (hands), monk[martial artist] flurry: two head-butts + Feral Combat Training = seven attacks. (It takes longer to put together and is weaker that the wild rager build above, but in the way high levels could conceivably be stronger if you can find a way to pounce and get through DR, because 100% of your weapon cashoola can be thrown at a single item -- your Amulet of Mighty Fists.)
|
|
What's really funny here is that you don't address the point of FCT being overpowered, since you don't use it in that build at all. You're only pointing out how natural attacks can be used to add to any combination, which further illustrates how the lack of them penalizes the monk, and provides weight for allowing the monk to get the attacks in addition to the rest of the classes. Also -
Permanency GMW with a +5, use amulet of mighty fists for special abilities.
Couple points - it's been clarified that gaining a natural attack type from more than one source like two sets of claw attacks *or two bite attacks* doesn't give you more attacks. Instead the claw attacks/bite attack dealing the most damage take precedence. You can probably find the thread if you care enough to dig around a bit. I don't. :p And if you could, then tack two more claws on with skill focus perception and eldritch heritage. Nothing says the claws can't be on elbows, knees, ears, or any other part of the body. So, nine attacks. And switch the race to half orc and grab the tusked trait. The bite entry actually never mentions the attack having to be made with teeth. Toothy feat then. And then that other one that gives them a bite attack. eleven attacks.
back to your build...
attack bonus of +16 at 5th level versus a cr 5 creature with the average ac *from bestiary* of 18 would net you a...
Well, your attack chain is +16/+16/+10/+10/+10
your average greatsword damage is 37.5
your bite is 22.5
and your claws are 25
So you've got (.9*37.5)+((.9*37.5)*.1)(greatsword)+(.9*37.5)+((.9*37.5)*.1)(greatsword)+( .6*22.5)+((.6*22.5)*.05)(bite)+(.6*25)+((.6*25)*.05)(claw)+(.6*25)+((.6*25) *.05)(claw)
So your actual dpr is 119.925
Your greatsword attacks are each dealing 37.125 dpr. Your bite is 14.175dpr. Your claw attacks are dealing 15.75 each.
You also get the chance to be confused when you're hit and start attacking your allies. Thanks wildrager.
And thanks to ragechemist, you're taking penalties to your will save and intelligence. The same will save to resist becoming confused and turning on your allies. And the intelligence penalty can render you comatose pretty easily.
Round 0 hold your potion and mutagen.
Round 1 pray to everything in existence that no one gets a single hit on you while you drink *and provoke by drinking*(and/or using that attack to destroy the potion/mutagen)
Round 2 Rage/destroy/hope you don't actually kill anything. And very possibly kill your own party.
So lets look at the main weaknesses here.
wis 7 -2 will +0 barb +0 alchemist +0 fighter for a total of -2 will saves.
You drop something to 0 hps or less. Thanks to wildrager, you need a dc 11 will save or become confused and attack the nearest creature. Thanks to your minus 2, you've got a 65% chance of failing and becoming confused.
Now, if you actually happen to get hit first, then ragechemist comes into play. If you get hit while your mutagen is active, you have at least a dc 15 will save to make. That's an 85% chance to fail. When you fail your save, you take a -2 to will saves and intelligence. These stack every round you get hit. Eight rounds of being hit to drop you via intelligence drain. However, only four rounds to make it impossible for you to make your wildrager save. And that dex penalty of yours won't make you any harder to hit.
So this character won't actually survive combat since his party will quickly kill him themselves to preserve their own lives.
Of course, any caster will be giggling with glee at this point anyhow.
I have to congratulate you though. This is the closest thing to the frenzied zerker I've seen in pathfinder.
|
|
What's really funny here is that you don't address the point of FCT being overpowered, since you don't use it in that build at all. You're only pointing out how natural attacks can be used to add to any combination, which further illustrates how the lack of them penalizes the monk, and provides weight for allowing the monk to get the attacks in addition to the rest of the classes. Also - *zot*
What's really funny is all the people moaning about monks (and what-not-else) being allegedly so horribly screwed because they can't hit like a dump-truck through a fruit-stand at 4th or 5th as can the Broken Jones down the street.
What it really "provides weight" for is smacking the Broken Jones with a 500 ton Nerf bat.
Thanks to wildrager, you need a dc 11 will save or become confused and attack the nearest creature. Thanks to your minus 2, you've got a 65% chance of failing and becoming confused.
That's why I called it irresponsible (only a jerk player would make something like that for a cooperative campaign such as PFS; the build is tailored to go nuts and kill its allies). -- But you could make almost the same thing with Crusader's Flurry and FCT; it'd just take a little longer.
What's really funny here is that you don't address the point of FCT being overpowered, since you don't use it in that build at all. You're only pointing out how natural attacks can be used to add to any combination, which further illustrates how the lack of them penalizes the monk, and provides weight for allowing the monk to get the attacks in addition to the rest of the classes. Also - *zot*What's really funny is all the people moaning about monks (and what-not-else) being allegedly so horribly screwed because they can't hit like a dump-truck through a fruit-stand at 4th or 5th as can the Broken Jones down the street.
What it really "provides weight" for is smacking the Broken Jones with a 500 ton Nerf bat.
Thanks to wildrager, you need a dc 11 will save or become confused and attack the nearest creature. Thanks to your minus 2, you've got a 65% chance of failing and becoming confused.That's why I called it irresponsible (only a jerk player would make something like that for a cooperative campaign such as PFS; the build is tailored to go nuts and kill its allies). -- But you could make almost the same thing with Crusader's Flurry and FCT; it'd just take a little longer.
Well. I'm not gonna argue no more, since you are just being stubborn now. But it's been fun anyway. I'll stay completely fine agreeing on disagreeing.
|
|
The mere notion that a 4th or 5th level character is suboptimal because they can't do on the high side of 50pts DPR versus CRn opponent defenses like the Broken Jones can...is absurd. The power-lurch some of you appear to desire in the game is unseemly.
Living Greyhawk is (was?) considered overpowered compared to PFS, but that Wild Rager build I posted above easily out-damages my 11th-level LG kick-ass-all-the-hell Outcast Champion glaive fighter, and the FCT builds are at least even with it. -- And that particular glaive build was arguably the most damaging melee character in the system at the time.
|
|
The mere notion that a 4th or 5th level character is suboptimal because they can't do on the high side of 50pts DPR versus CRn opponent defenses like the Broken Jones can...is absurd. The power-lurch some of you appear to desire in the game is unseemly.
Living Greyhawk is (was?) considered overpowered compared to PFS, but that Wild Rager build I posted above easily out-damages my 11th-level LG kick-ass-all-the-hell Outcast Champion glaive fighter, and the FCT builds are at least even with it. -- And that particular glaive build was arguably the most damaging melee character in the system at the time.
Haha :p
Maybe it's your builds you should be looking at :DAlso, you seem to be missing the point again.
The point being that if there are many combinations that can deal similar amounts of damage, then by definition they're not broken. They might be optimized builds, sure, but that doesn't make them broken.
Something that's broken has to deal a significantly higher amount of damage than other builds. You haven't shown that yet. There was a summoner charger build in the dpr olympics that was pretty broken. This was before all the summoner errata came down, btw. As I recall, it was ravingdork's build, and it was broken.
Also, never played Living Greyhawk, but it's no secret that pathfinder boosted the power of the base classes significantly. And no surprise that power levels don't compare. So comparing pathfinder to Greyhawk doesn't make any sense.
And finally, if you're trying to prove that FCT is broken, then use a build that actually incorporates FCT. Heck, you might even try posting a new thread with a title like "Help me prove FCT is broken!". I'd be happy to participate on that thread, trying to eke some more dps out of whatever build. However, you're not backing up your opinions with evidence or logic, just more opinion. And opinion isn't going to convince anyone that it hasn't already convinced at this point.
I finally have a way to play my were-tiger/monk
|
|
Haha :p ...Maybe it's your builds you should be looking at :DThat glaive-fighter did over 100pts on a single-chop with his patented "everything including the kitchen sink" attack at 11th: no crits, no multipliers.
The point being that if there are many combinations that can deal similar amounts of damage...
At 4th or 5th level?
Blarg. -- There is exactly one type of build: that which stacks multiple natural attacks onto multiple weapon attacks; and the DPR grotesquely outclasses anything else. The skin may look different on the outside, but mechanically they're all the same.
|
|
100 points doesn't really impress me :/ Sorry :/ I might be jaded from spending too much time on the forums though.
Might be comparable to that ninja/synthesist that was running something like 340 dpr on the big attack chain at 12, or the 300ish your level 12 polearm guy was dealing.
You seem like you want to change your argument from talking about feral to complaining about natural attacks in general, which is fine.
That doesn't really work out well though because natural attacks are available to anyone regardless of class. One feat for a bite, two feats for claws. Access for all.
Of course, most builds just won't get that much damage increase from a bite or two claw attacks. It takes a specialized build to eke noteworthy damage from them. But anyone who min-maxes much can tell you that there is a significant opportunity cost in picking up bite/claw attacks. Abilities that you give up on having, in return for them. So they end up being a marginal increase *or decrease* compared to the other abilities they could pick up.
A fifth level half-orc barbarian, for example, will have three feats and two traits (maybe). He could spend a trait grabbing a bite attack, but in exchange he would give up accelerated drinker or reactionary or berserker of the society. He could spend two feats grabbing the claw attacks, or he could spend them on power attack and weapon focus. Of course, weapon focus won't be quite as valuable now since it doesn't affect all his attacks, just one type. And there's always another feat that argues to be a payoff in more situations. It really restricts the value of natural attacks. Where you see that value most is at low levels, when most classes are looking at just one attack. A level one or two character with two attacks from twf and a couple attacks from natural weapons just looks disgusting. Until you realize that at those levels, you drop most enemies with one or two hits anyways. So most of those attacks go to waste during the move>attack phase. Same problem that's plagued melee for ages.
100 points doesn't really impress me :/ Sorry :/ I might be jaded from spending too much time on the forums though.
Might be comparable to that ninja/synthesist that was running something like 340 dpr on the big attack chain at 12, or the 300ish your level 12 polearm guy was dealing.
You seem like you want to change your argument from talking about feral to complaining about natural attacks in general, which is fine.
That doesn't really work out well though because natural attacks are available to anyone regardless of class. One feat for a bite, two feats for claws. Access for all.
Of course, most builds just won't get that much damage increase from a bite or two claw attacks. It takes a specialized build to eke noteworthy damage from them. But anyone who min-maxes much can tell you that there is a significant opportunity cost in picking up bite/claw attacks. Abilities that you give up on having, in return for them. So they end up being a marginal increase *or decrease* compared to the other abilities they could pick up.
A fifth level half-orc barbarian, for example, will have three feats and two traits (maybe). He could spend a trait grabbing a bite attack, but in exchange he would give up accelerated drinker or reactionary or berserker of the society. He could spend two feats grabbing the claw attacks, or he could spend them on power attack and weapon focus. Of course, weapon focus won't be quite as valuable now since it doesn't affect all his attacks, just one type. And there's always another feat that argues to be a payoff in more situations. It really restricts the value of natural attacks. Where you see that value most is at low levels, when most classes are looking at just one attack. A level one or two character with two attacks from twf and a couple attacks from natural weapons just looks disgusting. Until you realize that at those levels, you drop most enemies with one or two hits anyways. So most of those attacks go to waste during the move>attack phase. Same problem that's plagued melee...
Thanks again mate. You are saying everything right.
And finally, if you're trying to prove that FCT is broken...
Shouldn't that be "If you're trying to prove that FCT would be broken if interpreted against stated RAI..." ?