| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IS it wrong for me to see this as a superhero style pounder? I love it. But I don't understand how the knock back ability could ramp up though every 5 levels? How would a class that could that could knock back a an enemy 5' feet at 5th, 10' and 10th etc. be over powered. Did see why you had to wait all the to 20th to get a "basic strong man power". I can play Juggernaut now. Awesome
I actually think that could be a really fun image it is possible that it instead could be a series of feats. Knockback, cleaving knock back (2 targets) greater knock back (provokes) whirlwind knock back.
Though really it is just a bull rush maneuver tied to an unarmed strike without following the target. Like using bull rush strike on a crit. You just need a feat or ability that allows a standard action punch to bull rush. Then a chain could be added for cleave and whirlwind. No new mechanics created really just variations.
The distance knocked back is based on the cmd check not level because that mechanic already exists in bull rush. Using existing mechanics keeps things simpler and takes a lot less text to explain.
Since the brawler has a lot of feats it is a fun option defending a wall or bridge.
That is really one of the best things about the brawler. He gets to use all those feats that would be really cool to have in weird situations.
He is like a cyberman every time he encounters something different he can use an ability to upgrade and by pass it. Though this does mean ever time I see some using martial maneuvers I'll be temped to play a sound clip of the cyber men say "Upgrading". Or "upgrade in progress."
Power attack also scales up if applied to a primary natural attack. A primary natural attack is defined as an attack that receives 1.5x Str. Since monks and brawlers have their unarmed attacks treated as natural attacks(regardless of my disagreement with ciretose about how it works otherwise), Dragon Ferocity scales up the power attack bonus for unarmed strikes.
That isn't right. Primary natural attacks are not defined as an attack that adds 1.5x Str to damage. That is a feature of primary natural attacks. Primary natural attacks are defined by type (bite is primary, hoof secondary, etc) as detailed in the table (see natural attacks). Even if you're unarmed strikes count as natural weapons and get a 1.5x Str bonus to damage, they still do not qualify for higher Power Attack damage scaling.
From universal monster rules:
If a creature has only one type of attack, but has multiple attacks per round, that attack is treated as a primary attack, regardless of its type.
That refers to attacking with natural attacks. The rules are divergent on this for unarmed strikes and natural attacks.
A monk’s unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.
The universal monster rule quoted is neither a spell nor effect. It is a rule.
...
Seriously, I'm all for the awesomeness of monks and finding ways of making the most out of a monk character; but there is no reasonable justification for Dragon Ferocity granting the highest Power Attack scaling damage bonus. Consider conversely: the universal monster rule quoted by Tsillisx would apply to unarmed strikes regardless of Dragon Ferocity, therefore Power Attack would always give the +3 scaling damage on unarmed strikes. It doesn't, and Dragon Ferocity does not change that.
Some unarmed styles might limit you to hand strikes.. some might remove most but kicks but none of them have you repeatedly hitting the guy with the same limb over and over and the idea of such is even ridiculed in media. <If anyone remembers badly animated man points to you.>Such a thing would be truly ludicrous
Thats one maneuver in the arsenal of a character that throws, punches, jumpkicks, does a weird multi footed upside down spinning attack and chucks a fireball.. but I suppose if you want to just lose at streetfighter by underselling one of its actually more versatile characters you can do nothing but lightning leg.
Okay.. heres the thing.. take out your optimization and your theory crafting for a minute and remember this game also has a theme and a series of associated mental images with it, and it should be obvious by now that Paizo gives these images as much priority in design space as the maths. If a guy doesn't have TWF hes is <barring something odd> wielding 1 weapon which he uses to repeatedly whack his foe. The brawler is meant <From design not from what number crunching says is better.> to hit things unarmed. some unarmed styles might limit you to hand strikes.. some might remove most but kicks but none of them have you repeatedly hitting the guy with the same limb over and over and the idea of such is even ridiculed in media. <If anyone remembers badly animated man points to you.> I put forth that you cannot due to the general imagery associations of the game make an unarmed fighter that does not in some way have a flurry type ability.Luis Armstrong would like to have a word with you.
The Jazz musician ?
Hey. It's a primary natural attack and it adds 1-1/2 times your strength on the damage I don't really see why it wouldn't work for power attack. Further more. It only works on the first hit in a given round so it's a boost but it doesn't seem over powered.
No. Alex Luis Armstrong. The Strong Arm Alchemist.
I don't see how this is an argument.
Unarmed Strikes are natural weapons. With Dragon Ferocity they deal 1.5x damage. Power Attack triggers the extra damage on a natural attack that deals 1.5x damage.
How you come by that 1.5x damage is irrelevant. You still have it, and that's what the Feat says.
Of course now that we've argued about it it's sure to be errata'd out of spite and I'll just shake my head and punch myself in the face until it stops hurting.
For simplicity I'll keep and as much else as possible the same (moving a point from Dex to Wis. So this is quick and dirty, we can clean it up together.
** spoiler omitted **
Weapon training and gloves of dualing are the gap I think. I'm at +25 doing 2d6 + 16 (+1d4 bleed).
If I swap out your gloves for boots of speed and I think I got you at that point.
Even if you swap out my gloves, I'm at +25 doing 1d6+19/+17.
Not an overwhelming lead, but still a significant one. And Gloves of Dueling aren't even an option for the Brawler at all, and I consider them to be pretty much a given for anyone with Weapon Training. 1d6+21/+19 is a DEFINITE lead in static damage, and only one Feat (Monastic Legacy, didn't figure it was really worth it) away from weapon dice (which I can spare more easily than the Brawler. Look at all those freakin' Feats, you can tell I was reaching for things to do with them. The wings were borne of sheer boredom, but admittedly they've been super handy).
As well, my Ferocity would come on at 5th/6th at the latest, even without MoMS, so the lead at lower levels is probably a bit more noticeable (when 2 points of damage is the difference between a near-kill and an OHKO).
No. Alex Luis Armstrong. The Strong Arm Alchemist.
Friends through Muscles
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
so, i see the conversation has moved on from these questions, but from my playtest experience i'd like to address two of the questions that came up (again) in the last 12 hours:
1. Party Role- usually a primary damage dealer. in our playtest the brawler usually out damaged the greatsword wielding fighter(not occasionally- pretty much anytime they got to full attack). i posted builds a while ago- the fighter i posted was a little more optimized than the one that got played and even so his theorycraft expected DPR didn't catch the brawler until the enemies CR was at least APL+1 (and those calculations don't even take into account martial maneuvers). secondarily- MM gives them great flexibility as switch hitters or (if built for it) to be able to pick up several related combat maneuver feats to use against something vulnerable to them.
2. Brawler's Flurry- i completely support these coming later than the feats are available... the ability is clearly and obviously better than the feats. like a monk, you can do it with a single weapon (halving your weapon costs and allowing you to focus all your feats on a single weapon without it needing to be a light weapon) and you have no off-hand penalties (no 1/2-Str damage ever, always 1:2 power attack...); it is a potent ability and if you doubt it please see my earlier post about playtest results.
Of course now that we've argued about it it's sure to be errata'd out of spite and I'll just shake my head and punch myself in the face until it stops hurting.
I doubt you have to worry, they likely disagree with your reading (I do at least) and they'll only see a need to address this if the metagame suddenly develops this strange aberration. Given that there aren't that many unarmed specialists or monks (and that even fewer of those try that rules interpretation) there shouldn't be any noticeable events, and thus no clarification would be issued (errata wouldn't be needed by my reading).
No. Alex Luis Armstrong. The Strong Arm Alchemist.
I cant really say much about that not having seen enough FMA to know how he fights.. I would say that the fact he's mostly a comic relief bit is a mark against repeatedly punching someone with the same fist.
2. Brawler's Flurry- i completely support these coming later than the feats are available... the ability is clearly and obviously better than the feats. like a monk, you can do it with a single weapon (halving your weapon costs and allowing you to focus all your feats on a single weapon without it needing to be a light weapon) and you have no off-hand penalties (no 1/2-Str damage ever, always 1:2 power attack...); it is a potent ability and if you doubt it please see my earlier post about playtest results.
It's not only better in that regard, Sean K Reynolds agreed that - as written currently - the brawler counts as having those feats, and can thus qualify for feats that use those as prerequisites. Two-Weapon Defense. Two-Weapon Rend. Two-Weapon Feint. Other stuff.
No. Alex Luis Armstrong. The Strong Arm Alchemist.I cant really say much about that not having seen enough FMA to know how he fights.. I would say that the fact he's mostly a comic relief bit is a mark against repeatedly punching someone with the same fist.
I think the Strong Arm Alchemist is the epitome of the Vital Strike build brawler. Perhaps something like I did for nVali Letoba; who is built to completely ignore the flurry mechanic on the brawler.
Well, the gap (about 4 damage) is brought together a bit by the addition of Improved Critical.
Pure damage-wise my build could stand the shifting of two Feats to close that gap.
With the addition of Monastic Legacy instead of Improved Critical, I'm up to 1d10, and swapping Bleeding Attack for the Focused Study Feats gives me the 1d4.
With that I'm at ~27 damage vs your ~25, again bringing the gap up in my favor just by grabbing the same Feat as you had.
Like I said in the first post, one Feat away from similar damage dice (1d10). Same if we pull in items (Monk's Robe) but that just muddies the waters more since that's NOT class specific and you can get 2d8 or whatever from it and yada yada.
But, granted, it's not as drastic of a lead as I first thought (though I still think the Monk/Brawler multiclass is superior due to sheer number of Feats and Fuse Styles raising defenses. Partial good Will save progression doesn't hurt matters either).
Eh, my group isn't rules lite, so much as optimization lite.If you're adding falling damage to your attacks without some feat i'm aware of, you're VERY rules light.
Responded to this in a PM.
============================
For the people arguing 1.5 strength on unarmed strikes as natural weapons...
You do realize that in almost every instance in this game, Unarmed Strikes are specifically called out as not being natural weapons? I even made a thread about it awhile back.
@Rynjin - And the brawler still has the maneuvers and better armor (+3 flat bonus) and free TWF.
It is close, but I would still go brawler. Martial Maneuvers is pretty bad-ass when you consider how many maneuvers it opens up.
Honestly, it might become a dip class for that very reason.
Martial Maneuvers is really cool. I don't think it carries the class. Too few uses per day, too short a duration for it to be versatile enough to carry the class. ESPECIALLY for a dip.
Armor is a good point, though less depending on whether by RAW a Mithral Breastplate can get Brawling put on it (the GM for that game said no, which I can see why, but I personally think yes).
For the people arguing 1.5 strength on unarmed strikes as natural weapons...
You do realize that in almost every instance in this game, Unarmed Strikes are specifically called out as not being natural weapons? I even made a thread about it awhile back.
Yes. Almost every instance.
Except for Monk/Brawler Unarmed Strike.
Where they're specifically called out as counting as Natural Weapons.
In plain text.
Something I threw Together Real Quick. Mix of Crane Style and Dragon Style
Rick Roids, The soldier who lost his weapon but didn't want to miss out on the action because of it.
Male Fighter(Brawler)9/ Monk (MoMS) 2
CG medium humanoid
Init +2; Senses Perception 14
-=DEFENSE=-
AC 28, touch 19, flat 21 (armor +7, deflection +2, dex +2, dodge +5 (Fighting Defensively), Shield +2(Heavy Wooden Shield))
HP (9d10 +2d8 + 44 +9)
Fort 12; Ref 8; Will 8
-=OFFENSE=-
Speed 30ft
Melee unarmed attack +18/+13/(1d6+31 First hit, 1d6+25 Subsequent hits 20/x2)
Type: Bludgeon; Size: Medium; Wgt: - lbs
-=OTHER=-
Str 22, Dex 14, Con 16, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 7 (25pt buy, racial bonus on STR)
BAB +10; CMB +16 ; CMD 35
Feats: Power Attack, Weapon Focus(US), Iron Will, Dragon Style, Dragon Ferocity, Crane Style, Combat Reflexes, Crane Wing, Weapon Specialization(US), Crane Riposte, Improved Drag(For when he wants to take his new friend to meet his other friends), Toughness.
Traits quain martial artist, Armor Master
Favored class Fighter
Favored bonus 9 Hit Points
Brawler/Monk Abilities Close Control +2 to Drag, Bull Rush, Reposition, Close Combatant +2 To attack and combat maneuvers performed unarmed and +4 To Damage with Close Weapons. Menacing Stance -1 To adjacent enemy attack and -4 to concentration checks.
Fuse Style, Unarmed Strike, Evasion,
Skill Points: 26; Armor check penalty: -2
Items:
Brawling Elven Chain +1
Defending Amulet of Mighty Fist +1
Ring of Protection +2
Belt of Giant Strength +4
I wanted to show the character that didn't flurry his unarmed strikes. At later levels I might have him pick up the vital strike chain. And While I went with Light armor to maintain his speed at least he still had the option of wearing heavier armor. He hides behind his shield until he finds his opening and then let's out a rather impressive punch. Also I gave him drag to give him the option of pulling him towards comrades that could help him flank but don't want to get hit, like a rogue or something. Anyway I'm pretty new to these post builds so bare with me.
I took Brawler the fighter archetype. Not the Class. I built it as a comparison.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Chaotic Fighter
That build is invalid as you can't take Monk or Fighter levels when you take brawler and vise versa.
" Brawler (Archetype)"
And this is why calling a class after an already released (and commonly used) archetype was a terrible idea.
|
@Rynjin - For one level dip you get unarmed strike and martial maneuver once a day.
I would take that with a Martial class.
It lasts for a minute, which is an encounter, and it gives me access to how many feats that I might need at a given moment but didn't take?
Totally worth it, even only once a day. If you need disarm/grapple/sunder... you have it with a move action.
That is better than a bonus feat for me, and with unarmed strike on top of that...not bad.
I even pointed out it was the Archetype and there was still confusion.
then you should have put Fighter(Brawler)9/ Monk(MoMS) 2
rather than Brawler(Archetype)9/ MoMS 2
as we now have Fighter(Brawler) and Brawler() and putting the Classes and Archetype together Clears things up
that and Class name(Archetype name) is the most commonly used format on the boards
@Ciretose: Eh. I'll admit I've been in a situation quite a few times where I've been like "I really wish I had this Feat for THIS particular fight, darn" (usually Lunge or Blind-Fight), and as a dip that would be a good choice.
But I still don't think it carries the class, and that's the unique thing it has going for it. It needs at least a bit more oomph in the "raw power unarmed attacker" niche if it's not going to get anything more flashy (which I would be fine with).
then you should have put Fighter(Brawler)9/ Monk(MoMS) 2
rather than Brawler(Archetype)9/ MoMS 2as we now have Fighter(Brawler) and Brawler() and putting the Classes and Archetype together Clears things up
I will Keep that in mind. Also I will change it.
@Ciretose: Eh. I'll admit I've been in a situation quite a few times where I've been like "I really wish I had this Feat for THIS particular fight, darn" (usually Lunge or Blind-Fight), and as a dip that would be a good choice.
But I still don't think it carries the class, and that's the unique thing it has going for it. It needs at least a bit more oomph in the "raw power unarmed attacker" niche if it's not going to get anything more flashy (which I would be fine with).
Consider that (I hope!) there will be an "Extra Maneuvers" feat. Perhaps even "Long Maneuvers" (10minute duration). In that case a 1 level dip could actually be very advantageous.
I have a few suggestions to help improve the brawler
Fist fighting (EX): unarmed weapons (brass KNuckles, Cestis, gauntlets ect) improve their damage die every time the brawlers unarmed damage die improves.
nix the various magic alignment fists due to the above.
probobly reduce the damage growth of the fists as well due to the added damage of magic brass knuckles.
Mighty Blows (Ex): A brawler making a single attack unarmed or with an unarmed type weapon applies 1.5x str as if using a two handed weapon.
Timed Punches(EX): a brawler who makes a single attack against an enemy and ends his turn threatened by that enemy gains +2 ac against that enemy until his next turn and may make an attack of opportunity if that enemy attacks him. this attack of opportunity has a critical range of 18-20.
Practiced Grappler (Ex): a brawler counts as one size larger for the purposes of bonuses and penalties on grapple checks.
and of course the improvised weapon proficiency. as well as getting rid of eastern weapons.
just some thoughts
@Tsillisk:
In that case you need to accept that Dragon Ferocity grants a bonus to unarmed strike damage equal to half your strength bonus. Although mathematically that means that you've got 1.0 times your Strength, and 0.5 times your Strength, and therefore the sum is effectively 1.5 times your Strength. This is true for the effective total damage, but Dragon Ferocity doesn't make your Unarmed Strikes 1.5 times your Strength - it grants you bonus damage equal to 0.5 times your Strength.
Compare that with Dragon Style, which explicitly states that you can add 1.5 times your Strength bonus on your first unarmed strike (which, I will concede, could thus be construed to grant the +50% from Power Attack on the first attack).
If you were, for example, at 16 Strength (+3 bonus), and had both Dragon Style and Dragon Ferocity, then the first unarmed strike would grant a total of +5 to damage. +4 from the 1.5x Strength granted from Dragon Style. And +1 from the 0.5 Strength granted from Dragon Ferocity. That is because the abilities do not add directly and you do not gain an effective 2.0x Strength on your first unarmed strike, and thus not +6 to damage.
Now let us reconsider the benefit of Power Attack:
This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls.
Remember that an unarmed strike counts as both a manufactured weapon as well as a natural attack for the purposes of spells and effects. The text in Power Attack specifies behavior for both cases. This does not mean that you're allowed to chose the one that you prefer.
I don't know if there's precedent ruling on this, but I suspect in a case where both varieties of options are available (applying Occam's razor) the rule that takes priority is the one to which the subject in question belongs to natively. Unarmed strikes are listed with manufactured weapons, thus I think the reading in Power Attack that takes precedence is the one for manufactured weapons.
(Philosophically speaking, an unarmed strike appears to be closely related to natural attacks; but from a different perspective: an unarmed strike is a highly manufactured attack - martial arts theory has thousands of year history and the training for a given user to achieve high level of proficiency takes years. In that sense I am perfectly fine in accepting unarmed strikes as manufactured weapons.)
I can see the Dragon Ferocity+Power Attack combination going either way. However, I also think it should be moved to its own thread; the discussion concerns Monks, Brawlers, as well as Unarmed or Brawler Fighters, and only discussing it in the Brawler Class thread will prevent people not concerned with the playtest from discussing it, as well as making it potentially take more time for the people who work on rules errata from seeing it. At the same time, it clogs up this thread, which would be better served discussing Brawler-specific rules interactions, discussing thing sfound through reading, theorycrafting, and playtest.
On the main topic, I have two things to add: Firstly, I think Flurry shouldn't be part of the class's abilities, I would prefer something closer to the Master of Many Styles' abilities, as others have stated. Second, I think the class should have a different name, to avoid confusion, especially since the Fighter's Brawler archetype is based around similar concepts (unarmed\close-to-unarmed combat with full BAB)
@Katz:
Agreed on ending the debate (or transplanting it).
I also agree with making Flurry non-compulsory on the brawler. But I think it is a bad idea to grant a Master of Many Styles style-fusion ability to the brawler. That would create an attractive full-BAB dip class (I already find it a tremendous sore point that MoMS is such a terrifyingly potent dip class).
Finding an alternate name is difficult. A number of people mention this, but there has not been a suitable suggestion yet. That is understandable: all manner of suitable names are used in various archetypes already. The name can't be too specialized, as it should represent a generic (unarmed) fighting class. It's a bit of a conundrum.
@Tsillisx:
I don't mind stopping, but you're skipping a whole lot of arguments and jumping at what you feel validates your reasoning.
Play test. Thanks for the builds LoreKeeper. I swiped the first one you posted as a start.
-- david
|
Hi, I wasn't sure if I was supposed to start a separate thread or post here, but decided to post here.
Here's the background so the designers can understand where I'm coming from:
To begin, I'm generally happy with the idea of the new hybrid classes and the initial designs put out by the developers. I think alot of them need some work, but that's why we're having the playtest. I think the end results will be fine.
My group alternates each week between the Shattered Star AP and the Kingmaker AP. We have 15th level characters in Shattered Star and the GM tells me we're at the beginning of the last book. The play session referred to in this post has us travelling to an island, getting in and doing the first set of encounters (I don't want to be too specific to avoid spoilers, but I'm sure the design team is familiar with the AP). Our group consists of a Gnome Ranger/Archer, a Human Rogue (with one level Sorceror), a Human Druid with a Dino AC, an Aasimar Stormborn Sorceror (Seeker Archetype), a Human Cleric of Erastil/Archer, and my character, a Halfling/Plumkith Level 1 Fighter (Lore Warden) and 14th Level Monk (Ki Mystic/Qinggong Monk). My character is a Pathfinder and Professional Librarian. For the session, the Rogue and Ranger couldn't attend, so it was just the Druid, Sorceror, Cleric and my Monk.
In the interests of playtesting, my GM allowed me to re-work my Monk to be a 15th level Brawler, which I plan to play to the end of the Shattered Star AP. This included re-doing equipment so my Wealth did not change.
In re-designing my character, I kept the same race and stats. I could have tweaked my stats, but I liked them as they were. I overhauled my equipment and feats, and had to re-do my skills, though they didn't really change too much. Note that my character is STR-based (STR 24 with stat-boost item) with decent (but not high) DEX and WIS.
So, in playtesting, I am directly comparing a Fighter/Lore Warden 1, Monk/Ki Mystic/Qinggong Monk 14 with a Brawler 15. The Brawler I made was specifically designed as an unarmed combat guy - no weapons. He does have a dagger and shuriken. I haven't compared the Brawler with a 15th Level Fighter or any other class.
Here's my impressions:
I found the Brawler lackluster in comparison to my Monk. The Brawler has essentially the same combat power (BAB + damage), but loses most of the Monk's special abilities. If I had to make a general statement, the Brawler is the functional equivalent of a Monk largely stripped of its special abilities.
At 15th Level, both have 5 bonus feats. Both have a bonus to AC. Both have a "Flurry" that is largely (though not exactly) functionally equivalent. Both have an ability vs DRs (Silver, Cold, Adamantine) with their unarmed attacks. Both have enhanced damage with unarmed attacks.
Brawlers get Martial Maneuvers (more on this later) and Maneuver Training. Brawlers also can effectively use Shields (and only lose the AC Bonus, which is more than offset by the shield). They also get Knockout and a capstone at 16th and 20th level.
Brawlers (in comparison to Monks) lose good Will Saves, Stunning Fist (or whatever swap you get from an Archetype, like Punishing Kick or ELemental Fist), Evasion and Improved Evasion, Fast Movement, Still Mind, Ki Pool (BIG LOSS) and many more abilities.
Maneuver Training is nice offset to a portion of the lost Monk abilities. I like it and found it useful.
Martial Maneuvers, however, is largely worthless as currently written. It has a great deal of potential to make up for all the lost Monk abilities, but given the Action Economy it uses, it's Bleah. Out of a half dozen combats, I only ended up using Martial Maneuvers once to get a single feat, since I just couldn't afford to give up a Move or Standard action (and stay relevant to the fight). I did see a few opportunities that if I could have added 2-3 feats as a swift action, I could have done some really cool stuff (once, I was set up for a whirlwind attack, but using a Standard Action meant it was never going to happen). My impression is the design team went with a combination of uses per day based on level, and number of feats per use based on a combination of level and "action" type to activate. First, this one ability needs to make up for ALOT that you lose versus Monk. Second, unless your GM is the type to give you lots of opportunities to "prep" before rolling initiative, that means you're buffing during combat - you will lose a round of combat, which is very significant. When high enough level, you can use a Swift or Immediate action to put up a single feat, and that's useful, but then Martial Maneuvers becomes a minor ability that doesn't offset the lost Monk abilities. I very strongly recommend that the design team consider changing Martial Maneuvers to simply make it a swift action to use. Considering the lost Monk abilities, I don't see a need to gimp the ability in the action economy. Depending on the character's level, let them use a swift action to add one-two-three feats. It's very cinematic and power to be switching feats on the fly, and I really think it's be cool in play. I'd still rate it as less powerful than all the lost Monk abilities, but I'd consider it close enough that I'd consider actually making a Brawler in the future.
I note that Brawler gets 5 bonus feats by level 15, as does Monk, and that Fighter gets 8 bonus feats. At 15th Level Martial Maneuvers gives the Brawler the functional equivalent of 8 bonus feats (5 + 3). I felt slightly feat starved with the Brawler, but Martial Maneuvers easily makes up for this, but only if it's usable.
Another less important comment on Martial Maneuvers. The current "list" of feats is going to always generate questions, fights and arguments. I think someone else mentioned this, but I'd simply dispense with the current list and go with saying the Brawler can select any "Combat Feat" from the Combat Feat list. It's simple, easy to administer and should eliminate most arguments. I like simple.
I like the way the Brawler does Flurry. Full BAB with Two-Weapon Fighitng is the way to go. If Paizo ever re-designs the Monk, I strongly recommend they go this route, rather than the current somewhat confusing Monk's Flurry.
I noticed the Shield "loophole" (only lose the AC bonus). I don't know if this was intended by the designers, or intentional. I personally don't like it and avoided it in my build. For true min/maxers, I don't see any reason why you wouldn't use a shield, unless your build requires two free hands for some reason. You might end up with the shield build being the standard way to go - most every Brawler using a shield. Again, if that's what the designers want to see, then fine. I think they should either increase the "cost" of using a shield (if they want PCs to have that option) or make it unpalatable (if they don't want to see huge numbers of shield bearing Brawlers). One way would be to change Brawler's Flurry so that the Brawler cannot use Brawler's Flurry if you use a shield without proficiency. This imposes a feat tax (one feat) if you want your Brawler to use a shield. I think this would be fair and cause the decision on whether to use a shield to be more balanced.
On Brawler's Flurry, I like the ability to substitute disarm, sunder and trip maneuvers for unarmed attacks. I don't know if this is intentional or not, but I'd like this to be reworded to include other "attack" type maneuvers, like Dirty Trick, Reposition, etc. The designers could either re-write the ability to be more generic, or could specifically call out these maneuvers. If this was intentional (limiting it to these three maneuvers), then I think Brawler specific feats that allow them to use Brawler's Flurry with these other maneuvers would be appropriate.
I've seen some comments about the Brawler's weapon choices. I've got no problems whatsoever with the "Oriental" weapons. You can call them Oriental, but many of them are found in the Inner Sea. Yes, they're "Oriental" on our world (real Earth), but I don't see them that way in Golarion. On the other hand, I'm fine with the suggestion of changing the Brawler's weapons to the Fighter's Close Weapons Group. NOTE that shields are on that list, so the designers need to decide if they want shields to be the item of choice for all Brawlers, or if shields need to be treated differently to provide some balance to whether they get selected. Also, if changing to the "Close Weapons Group", I think the designers should say all Close Weapons and all Monk Weapons can be used with Brawler's Flurry. The Brawler might not be proficient with all Monk Weapons, but their design does allow for Flurry type use, so they should still be called out as being eligible for use with a Flurry.
On feats. I know that Brawler counts as Monk and Fighter for feat pre-requisites. But you may need to clarify if Brawler counts as Monk for HOW feats work. Brawler specifically calls out Stunning Fist, but do Brawlers get Monk (1/Level) or non-Monk (1/4 levels) uses per day with Punishing Kick, Elemental Fist, Touch of Serenity and Perfect Strike?
Equipment Note: My Monk had a Monk's Robe. I dispensed with it when doing the Brawler because I couldn't figure out how it works for a Brawler. Stuff like this needs to be sorted out.
Also, if the designers in the end decide to allow bybrids to multi-class with their base classes, then does Brawler's Flurry stack with Monk's Flurry of Blows, etc. More stuff to work out.
At 15th level, I haven't used Knockout or the capstone ability and don't really have an opinion on them at this time.
Bottom line, as written, I really don't see any reason I would ever run a Brawler instead of a Monk. It needs more oomph. Changing Martial Maneuvers to a Swift Action in all cases would provide most of that oomph and under that circumstance, I'd consider the Brawler over the Monk, though without a tiny bit more, I'd still favor the Monk unless I was going for a specific Roleplay result.
I'll keep playing the Brawler and if I have any more opinions I'll post them over the next couple of months.
Keep up the good work.
I would like to see a weaponmaster martial monk. One who can use any weapon (more or less) and be able to use his hand damage through it. Perhaps, enlarged hand damage with 2 handed weapons. Every martial arts movie I see usually has at least one monk using a polearm.
I would also like to see monks be able to use their special material DR bypass with their weapon of choice. Maybe require weapon focus?
Martial Maneuvers, however, is largely worthless as currently written. It has a great deal of potential to make up for all the lost Monk abilities, but given the Action Economy it uses, it's Bleah. Out of a half dozen combats, I only ended up using Martial Maneuvers once to get a single feat, since I just couldn't afford to give up a Move or Standard action (and stay relevant to the fight). I did see a few opportunities that if I could have added 2-3 feats as a swift action, I could have done some really cool stuff (once, I was set up for a whirlwind attack, but using a Standard Action meant it was never going to happen). My impression is the design team went with a combination of uses per day based on level, and number of feats per use based on a combination of level and "action" type to activate. First, this one ability needs to make up for ALOT that you lose versus Monk. Second, unless your GM is the type to give you lots of opportunities to "prep" before rolling initiative, that means you're buffing during combat - you will lose a round of combat, which is very significant. When high enough level, you can use a Swift or Immediate action to put up a single feat, and that's useful, but then Martial Maneuvers becomes a minor ability that doesn't offset the lost Monk abilities. I very strongly recommend that the design team consider changing Martial Maneuvers to simply make it a swift action to use. Considering the lost Monk abilities, I don't see a need to gimp the ability in the action economy. Depending on the character's level, let them use a swift action to add one-two-three feats. It's very cinematic and power to be switching feats on the fly, and I really think it's be cool in play. I'd still rate it as less powerful than all the lost Monk abilities, but I'd consider it close enough that I'd consider actually making a Brawler in the future.
I think this depends heavily on how you build your brawler. There are significant limitations on Martial Maneuvers (number of uses and duration) - but the activation cost isn't something I consider a problem. If you feel that you cannot spend a move-action at level 10 to get the 2 feats you need right now, then you have some very restrictive encounters. I'm guessing that your character would rather full-attack in that round, and sometimes that is just what you should do - but there are a majority of situations where I rather use the appropriate action to get the feats that "solve" an encounter.
e.g. you could spend 5 rounds flurrying and ineffectually deal small bits of damage (due to DR that you cannot overcome) or you can spend part of a round getting Penetrating Strike and Greater Penetrating strike and deal more damage in the following 2 rounds than in 5 rounds of not overcoming the DR.
I learned after the fact that we were not using the rules for Martial Maneuvers appropriately. We were allowing the change @ will, which was of course overpowered. After reviewing my notes from playtesting, I found the following:
-Had we employed the rules correctly, it would have been much more in balance with game style. It still would have allowed a great deal more flexibility, and also put a requirement of more bookkeeping on the Player than a typical fighter. I found that making my spreadsheet of feats I met the requirements for was incredibly useful at ensuring ready play (to use the golf terminology) and not slow combat down to a crawl.
-We (me and the DM) still would have benefitted from tighter restrictions on what feats were appropriate and what weren't, as well more clarification (which has already been addressed).
Finally got a chance this evening to sit down with the playtest document and two things struck me immediately upon reading the brawler entry:
- The inclusion of monk weapons really isn't in line with the flavour of the class
We're addressing that (see the sticky post at the top of this thread).
- something along the lines of Improvised Weapon Mastery would be an excellent fit as a class ability
You can use martial maneuvers to get that, though.
Thanks to everyone for their comments, character builds, and playtest feedback!
Because name recommendations were called out. Bruiser maybe?
What about re-naming it Brutalist?
- something along the lines of Improvised Weapon Mastery would be an excellent fit as a class abilityYou can use martial maneuvers to get that, though.
Thanks to everyone for their comments, character builds, and playtest feedback!
But, uh, I think the point was that it fit the "tavern brawler" dealy and might be neat for the class to have proficiency in IMprovised Weapons permanently.
I mean technically you can use Martial Maneuvers to get Martial/Exotic weapon proficiency too but that doesn't help people who wanna build a guy around using certain weapons lol.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For what it's worth, I like the name Brawler, but I could settle with Pugilist, as that's basically what it is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For what it's worth, I like the name Brawler, but I could settle with Pugilist, as that's basically what it is.
Pugilist would be nice as there would no longer be confusion between Brawler (Class) and Brawler (Archetype)
For what it's worth, I like the name Brawler, but I could settle with Pugilist, as that's basically what it is.
I like the name, too; I think it fits the class nicely. The issue is there's ALREADY an unarmed combatant fighter archetype called the Brawler (And not sure Pugilist would work; there's a Brutal Pugilist barbarian)
Bruiser would fit, and as far as I'm aware, isn't yet taken
But, uh, I think the point was that it fit the "tavern brawler" dealy and might be neat for the class to have proficiency in IMprovised Weapons permanently.
Well, if you want to be proficient in improvised weapons, you can just take Catch Off-Guard or Throw Anything, both of which are available at 1st level (or wait until your 2nd-level bonus feat). The typical "tavern brawler" character isn't going to be 8th level (BAB +8 for Improvised Weapon Mastery), and that feat increases your improvised weapon damage and crit range.
In other words, improvised weapons is an option for a brawler build, but I don't think it should be default for all brawlers, any more than I think all brawlers should get Weapon Focus (unarmed strike). And note that COG and TA are effectively Weapon Focus (improvised melee weapon) and Weapon Focus (improvised ranged weapon).
|
I'd like to see a brawler ability to take weapon specific feats such as weapon focus and apply it to a type of improvised weapon (Such as pipes, mugs, bottles, broken wood, etc.). Think it would give a bit more of a brawler theme to it. ("I am a highly trained martial warrior...who has mastered the ancient art of smashing faces with bottles")