anyway...
The more I see the class the more I want to love it, but somehow it just falls a tiny bit flat. The problem with having a mechanic that allows you to gain feats, is that you have a character who has nothing distinctive to their class.
If you look at the other hybrid classes they at least have features that differentiate them enough to be interesting characters in their own right.
anyway...
The more I see the class the more I want to love it, but somehow it just falls a tiny bit flat. The problem with having a mechanic that allows you to gain feats, is that you have a character who has nothing distinctive to their class.
If you look at the other hybrid classes they at least have features that differentiate them enough to be interesting characters in their own right.
I dunno. BEing able to switch combat styles up on the fly is distinguishing.
The issue however is that it's not really on the fly it's more limited then that. Which is a real shame because I love the idea behind it.
I think the playtest of the brawler would've been aided significantly if brawler-orientated feats were presented as part of the playtest write-up. (Similar to the feat presented for the swashbuckler.) The situation we have here now is that individual members of the class distinguish themselves by their feat choices; for us playtesters that means that the brawler is not really distinguishable from a fighter - due to the lack of brawler specific options available to playtest.
A feat that I think is neat popped up in my head:
You are particularly adept at getting the most out of situations.
Prerequisites: Martial maneuvers class ability
Benefit: When making use of your martial maneuvers class ability, your ability scores are considered 2 higher for the purpose of meeting the prerequisites of feats gained with martial maneuvers.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A feat that I think is neat popped up in my head:
You are particularly adept at getting the most out of situations.
Prerequisites: Martial maneuvers class ability
Benefit: When making use of your martial maneuvers class ability, your ability scores are considered 2 higher for the purpose of meeting the prerequisites of feats gained with martial maneuvers.
I dig this. This makes me happy on a crazy level. Like. Awesome. It does make me wish the Brawler got Combat Expertise or something for free.
|
A feat that I think is neat popped up in my head:
You are particularly adept at getting the most out of situations.
Prerequisites: Martial maneuvers class ability
Benefit: When making use of your martial maneuvers class ability, your ability scores are considered 2 higher for the purpose of meeting the prerequisites of feats gained with martial maneuvers.
This looks like an awesome idea. It makes combat expertise, and other feats with ability score requirements be easier to take.
on a different note, shouldn't martial maneuvers be done in pool fashion instead of smite fashion? Not just by the duration, but also in the usage. I mean, the ability is neat, but you have it a little bit more times/day then paladins have smite evil, but the paladin has very few reasons to use more then one smite/encounter (multiple enemies I guess, but generally BBEGs are single foes and smite isn't used for mook clearing) while the brawler will eventually be dropping 3 uses in a single fight, and both only have the one use. If it were a pool (1/2 level+stat, maybe +x as well), with options letting you do things like combat maneuvers without provoking or combat maneuvers at the end of attacks or something, it would be a much more versatile ability, and something to call your own.
This was brought up and the devs said no. Bypassing certain types of DR is a quick check. (Do I, or don't I?) Bypassing a set amount of DR requires extra math every time. (Also, it would invalidate the comparatively low DR/- that is supposed to protect against all attacks, and it would start bypassing DR/Epic from low levels, which would be weird.)- Instead of giving magic/material properties to his attacks, why not make the Brawler's attack penetrate an increasing amount of damage reduction and hardness?
DR/Epic has built in protection. Nothing bypasses it except epic stuff.
And they already have the mechanic built into the core game rules (not even an expansion): Penetrating Strike and Greater Penetrating Strike.
Though, since they are feats the Brawler qualifies for, he could use them (even with martial maneuvers).
It is a nice idea though, to have something different from the Ki-based DR penetration of the Monk.
|
Suggestion - all the Style feats are combat feats, so the Brawler could pick them up fairly easily, and use Martial Maneuvers to change styles on the fly. Could we have a class ability, archetype or feat that would let the Brawler have multiple Styles active simultaneously, similar to the Master of Many Styles Monk?
|
|
Suggestion - all the Style feats are combat feats, so the Brawler could pick them up fairly easily, and use Martial Maneuvers to change styles on the fly. Could we have a class ability, archetype or feat that would let the Brawler have multiple Styles active simultaneously, similar to the Master of Many Styles Monk?
Its been mentioned a few times. I actually had an
I did a quick stat up of a 1st level Brawler "Taskmaster" style yesterday; I like it a lot, especially with the change to Martial Maneuvers between v.1 and 2.
Haven't actually played with it yet (and he's definitely not optimized, which suits me fine; I wanted a guy who had a lot of different potential to go different things as needed. He may not be very good at any one thing, but that will just make it all the sweeter when he succeeds at something.) He's MAD right now - I gave him 13s in Str, Wis, Dex, and Int, which gives him a gateway to most of the feat chains (even though some of them won't become viable until higher levels, like Stunning Fist). It would be very simple to keep him more tightly focused in one or two stats, and still have a load of options available.
I definitely am in agreement that there needs to be more usage of the Martial Maneuvers ability (both for the obvious 1/day at levels 1-3 as well as just how distinctive the ability makes the class).
I'd actually be willing to take fewer bonus feats overall, if there were more uses per day of the Martial Maneuvers, or a recharge mechanic or something to it. I think that really is the most defining and interesting mechanic of this class. Which isn't to say that an unarmed combat class isn't good enough on its own- I was fine with it, but the more I see possibilities in Martial Maneuvers, the more I want to see that take a more prominent role in the Brawler.
The class can't do anything that it can really call its own until 13th level.This is a valid criticism.
How about unique unarmed attacks?
Quick Jab
A quick unarmed attack meant to create an opening in the target's defense. If the attack hits, it deals half unarmed attack damage. If it misses, the target suffers a -2 penalty to AC (and CMD?) against the next attack from the brawler or until the start of her next turn.
Cross
A powerful unarmed attack that leaves the brawler open. This unarmed attack adds bonus damage equal to current AC bonus granted by the brawler class feature. Can only be used while the AC bonus is active. The AC bonus is lost until the beginning of the next turn.
Side idea:
Hamatula Strike is a feat
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/hamatula-strike-combat
I would like Brawler to have some way of getting the ability to perform a grapple (or other combat maneuver) on a successful unarmed strike. I know there's a feat to do piercing with unarmed which lets you then get Hamatula strike, but I was thinking a more direct "Improved Grab" sort of feat or ability.
I can understand that Master of Many Style-like multi-styles would be in high demand for the brawler (and a suitable archetype makes sense); but for the core brawler?
"What is Batman doing? Waving his arms around like that?"
"I think he watched Snake in Eagle's Shadow again last night."
All that said, I would suggest the following:
You can instinctively blend fighting styles.
Prerequisites: One style feat, martial maneuvers class ability
Benefits: While making use of martial maneuvers, you may activate multiple styles as if you were a master of many styles of your brawler level.
The class can't do anything that it can really call its own until 13th level.This is a valid criticism.
How about unique unarmed attacks?
Quick Jab
A quick unarmed attack meant to create an opening in the target's defense. If the attack hits, it deals half unarmed attack damage. If it misses, the target suffers a -2 penalty to AC (and CMD?) against the next attack from the brawler or until the start of her next turn.Cross
A powerful unarmed attack that leaves the brawler open. This unarmed attack adds bonus damage equal to current AC bonus granted by the brawler class feature. Can only be used while the AC bonus is active. The AC bonus is lost until the beginning of the next turn.
+1 for this line of thought.
Superman punch: when the Brawler makes a charge attack she may jump and add her weight to the force of the blow to deal twice her strength modifier to the damage of the blow, but suffers a -2 to armor class and a -4 to attempts to trip or reposition the Brawler (as the short leap left her unbalanced). In addition, the brawler may add the effects of vital strike to such a charge.
Combination punch: when the brawler uses Brawler's furry she may choose to take a -2 to the attack rolls to land the punches just so. Whenever she lands two consecutive attacks she may deal an extra 1d8+1/2 str of damage, and after a third consecutive landed attack (and every consecutive attack thereafter) she may deal an additional 1d12+1/2 str of rend damage.
As an additional note: a modified version of quick jab and combination punch could lead to tactically chosen punch combinations or katas where the first and/or second attacks are jabs to increase the likelihood that the attacks on the 3rd and 4th punches deal the rend damage.
I can understand that Master of Many Style-like multi-styles would be in high demand for the brawler (and a suitable archetype makes sense); but for the core brawler?
"What is Batman doing? Waving his arms around like that?"
"I think he watched Snake in Eagle's Shadow again last night."
U srs
Watch Batman fight.
Tell me he's not using a style.
Especially in the Arkham games. If that's not Snake or Crane Style I don't know what is.
Currently playtesting. Two suggestions came up:
-Shrug it Off ability to roll Fortitude save to keep fighting, similar to Rogue Defensive Roll.
-to allow the Brawler to regain uses of Martial Maneuvers when he deals the killing/subduing blow against an enemy, beats someone's CMD by 5 or more when performing a combat maneuver, or successfully Demoralizing an opponent with the Intimidate skill (unsure on the last one, but it was suggested, so passing it along).
I can understand that Master of Many Style-like multi-styles would be in high demand for the brawler (and a suitable archetype makes sense); but for the core brawler?
"What is Batman doing? Waving his arms around like that?"
"I think he watched Snake in Eagle's Shadow again last night."
U srs
Watch Batman fight.
Tell me he's not using a style.
Especially in the Arkham games. If that's not Snake or Crane Style I don't know what is.
I don't consider the games canon. He obviously uses mixed martial arts, but specifically a style in the Pathfinder sense... I don't buy that. He's far too pragmatic to settle himself on a style.
I don't consider the games canon. He obviously uses mixed martial arts, but specifically a style in the Pathfinder sense... I don't buy that. He's far too pragmatic to settle himself on a style.
Except the Styles are not martial arts styles. They're more general things a lot of martial arts can do.
Block and counterattack is not some ultra specific martial art.
And yes, he wouldn't settle on a single style. Hence the Master of Many Styles thing. =p
Also, the games are just the easiest to see. When you see him actually fight someone (not just "Punch...*THUD*" like on minions) in the comics and cartoons and even in the movies (though these are probably less likely to be in your canon than the games) he blocks, counterattacks, attacks weak points, etc.
Making fun of styles by likening them to some silly 80's martial arts flick doesn't really give a good argument against their use, because it's not really based in any sort of fact as to how they work.
I don't consider the games canon. He obviously uses mixed martial arts, but specifically a style in the Pathfinder sense... I don't buy that. He's far too pragmatic to settle himself on a style.I can understand that Master of Many Style-like multi-styles would be in high demand for the brawler (and a suitable archetype makes sense); but for the core brawler?
"What is Batman doing? Waving his arms around like that?"
"I think he watched Snake in Eagle's Shadow again last night."
U srs
Watch Batman fight.
Tell me he's not using a style.
Especially in the Arkham games. If that's not Snake or Crane Style I don't know what is.
Welll... Batman is not a Brawler, Monk, Rogue, Ninja or Ranger...
"Batman" is Bruce Wayne's class. A very overpowered class, might I add. And he got extremely lucky rolls during character creation too... Having infinite WBL and all sorts of "artifacts" doesn't make it any more balanced either... lol
I'd say has all good saves, but maybe he has poor Fort... Bats seems to be poisoned at least twice a month... Well, I guess that's to be expected when half your enemies use some sort of toxin as part of their main arsenal...
I don't consider the games canon. He obviously uses mixed martial arts, but specifically a style in the Pathfinder sense... I don't buy that. He's far too pragmatic to settle himself on a style.
Except the Styles are not martial arts styles. They're more general things a lot of martial arts can do.
Block and counterattack is not some ultra specific martial art.
I think we have a very different understanding of the (Pathfinder) styles then. Blocking and counter-attack is normal combat in Pathfinder, when somebody misses you, that could be because you blocked, parried, dodged, or just did the manly thing and let the weapon slide of your battle-hardened hide.
The (Pathfinder) styles go well and far beyond that. They are highly specialized and many unlock unique ways of fighting.
What Batman does is ordinary martial arts. Exactly what you say: block, counter attack, hit weak points, etc. That is ordinary stuff. Well executed. Effective. But ordinary.
"What's he doing now?"
"Don't know ... what? It... looks... like... Kung Pow? ooeeoooeeeoooeeee!"
I think we have a very different understanding of the (Pathfinder) styles then. Blocking and counter-attack is normal combat in Pathfinder, when somebody misses you, that could be because you blocked, parried, dodged, or just did the manly thing and let the weapon slide of your battle-hardened hide.
The (Pathfinder) styles go well and far beyond that. They are highly specialized and many unlock unique ways of fighting.
What Batman does is ordinary martial arts. Exactly what you say: block, counter attack, hit weak points, etc. That is ordinary stuff. Well executed. Effective. But ordinary.
Yes, I must have a very different understanding.
Since block+counterattack is not a core function in the rules. You can block/dodge an attack or whatever, but you cannot counterattack (use the opening from the opponent's attack to make one of your own), you merely attack back.
If you get punched in the face or dodge a punch, hitting him back after a few seconds is not a counterattack.
Anticipating the enemy's attack, deflecting it, and then smacking them while their arm is extended is a counterattack, and that's what Snake and Crane Styles let you do.
Dragon Style is basically just "I hit stuff harder".
Mantis Style is picking out weak spots and attacking them.
Tiger Style is about advancing on a fleeing or weakened target, and making heavy blows when you get to them.
Boar Style is about ripping people to shreds with your fingernails.
Nothing in this speaks of "Kung Pow, Enter the Fist" to me.
"What's he doing now?"
"Don't know ... what? It... looks... like... Kung Pow? ooeeoooeeeoooeeee!"
This is not what Styles are unless you want your character to be very silly.
Don't try to force my characters to be very silly when I don't want them to be.
Why Sneak Attack?
Nothing about this class' design goal says Sneak Attack whatsoever.
I could see sneak attack as an archetype. The dirty fighter who throws sand in your face and then hits you in the soft bits while you're distracted.
|
|
Playtested a Brawler earlier today, found a few
2.)As has been said many, many, many, many, times, Martial Maneuvers needs quite a few more uses. It really didn't help whatsoever in the fight because I had to keep saving the 1/day usage, and when I finally felt like using it, it was wasted.
3.)The class is flat-out better than a fighter. Yes, I did less DPR than a fighter would have done, but I was overall much more effective with all of the skills.
This is what I would want in a brawler:
1. Something that is kind of a combo between the fighter's brawler archetype, and the fighter's cad archetype.
2. Add in improvised weapons (including throw anything) and some sneak attack damage.
3. Let them be proficient in all martial weapons.
4. More bonus feats, no martial maneuvers. It was an interesting idea, but I don't relish it as a player. I would rather just get a few more feats.
5. Give them their progressed unarmed damage as the base damage that they do with any close weapon, or improvised weapon.
6. Lower their progressed damage and add in sneak attack damage.
Just gonna give a response to some of these ideas.
1 and 2.)Those seem like archetypes, and I don't see where you are getting the sneak attack idea. Nice ideas for archetypes (one focused on doing dirty trick maneuvers with close weapons, and one focused on improvised weapons), but they don't seem to fit with the base class.
3.)I kinda agree here, in that it would be useful. But honestly, it isn't that easy to brawl with swords and reach weapons. I would personally prefer this kept as a class focused on getting really close and doing damage. Not a bad idea, but could lead to some characters built that don't quite fit the theme.
4.)I disagree. Martial Maneuvers are one of the only thing that makes this class anything more than just "I Full Attack every round", or "I grapple every round".
5.)I think this should be done, but the damage progression nerfed with normal weapons (like have weapon base damage use the unarmed strike damage of a brawler of 1/2 or 1/3 your brawler level, and if the total is less then one, use weapon base damage), to give unarmed weapons an edge other than pure character concept and always being armed (which you are anyway). But I like the concept.
6.)Maybe as an archetype, but I don't see where sneak attack is created when mixing fighter and monk. I don't see it fitting thematically in the base class.
|
What about something like this?
Slip the Jab: The brawler can ignore the first 5ft of reach for the purposes of AoOs.
Or something like this. This way he'll be able to get up into the fray with some more ease and the start pounding faces. I'm thinking about how Joe Fraiser was good at this. He was a brawler in the ring.
I think we have a very different understanding of the (Pathfinder) styles then. Blocking and counter-attack is normal combat in Pathfinder, when somebody misses you, that could be because you blocked, parried, dodged, or just did the manly thing and let the weapon slide of your battle-hardened hide.
The (Pathfinder) styles go well and far beyond that. They are highly specialized and many unlock unique ways of fighting.
What Batman does is ordinary martial arts. Exactly what you say: block, counter attack, hit weak points, etc. That is ordinary stuff. Well executed. Effective. But ordinary.
Yes, I must have a very different understanding.
Since block+counterattack is not a core function in the rules. You can block/dodge an attack or whatever, but you cannot counterattack (use the opening from the opponent's attack to make one of your own), you merely attack back.
If you get punched in the face or dodge a punch, hitting him back after a few seconds is not a counterattack.
This is because we have different approaches to the game. The GM and PCs collectively form a narrative. The bells and whistles of that story are essentially up to you. If you limit that story to a purely mechanical story of hit/not-hit, then I think you're missing out. The game has to follow a turn-based progression - but that is not a reason to imagine the actual encounters as taking place in turns with me attacking the enemy and then a bit later the enemy attacking me. The narrative freely allows you to make the fights as exciting as you want (based on the "facts" established by mechanical actions and dice rolls).
Why I think the (Pathfinder) styles are special, is that you are implying that the only way in Pathfinder in all battles across Golarion the only people to ever block and counter attack, are those that have Snake and Crane style. (And duelists are the only ones that parry/riposte). Furthermore, since levels are involved, the only people that can block and counter are people that are not affected by a sleep or are monks (as you need to be level 7 and 9 respectively unless you're a master of many styles).
Certainly, mechanically the Crane Style blocks and counter attacks. The narrative is not limited to that though. You could say that a block never happened as you interrupted the attack by anticipating it and attacking first. Perhaps your crane style user mastered the years of iron body training, he too doesn't block in the conventional sense: the attack is just rendered ineffective against the iron body technique, leaving the attacker open for attack. Another crane style user really blocks, but he doesn't use the minimal effort needed - his movements are wide and with arms that swing in broad circles. The block is essentially not a direct block, but indirect: due to the pattern that the user weaves enemy attacks have a hard time striking through the pattern and failed attempts are thus blocks.
I am perfectly happy to describe the crane style's block and counter attack as a "special" block and counter attack; but everybody else blocks and counters too. Frequently.
(Though I hasten to add, there is no wrong way to have fun.)
This is because we have different approaches to the game. The GM and PCs collectively form a narrative. The bells and whistles of that story are essentially up to you. If you limit that story to a purely mechanical story of hit/not-hit, then I think you're missing out. The game has to follow a turn-based progression - but that is not a reason to imagine the actual encounters as taking place in turns with me attacking the enemy and then a bit later the enemy attacking me. The narrative freely allows you to make the fights as exciting as you want (based on the "facts" established by mechanical actions and dice rolls).
The problem here is that your definition doesn't make the combats more interesting. It turns Style users into a farce, something to not be taken seriously.
I didn't say fights weren't a series of blocks, dodges, and attacks, but "counterattacking" has a very specific meaning in my own head, and it's not "Block an attack and retaliate".
The latter is two separate acts, and it's how most fighters go about things. Styles, in my eyes, kick that up a notch. A true counterattack is one fluid motion, it is not separated into block and attack, it is simply the counterattack. It counteracts the enemy attack and launches one of your own at the same time. And that's just one or two Styles you basically ruin thematically (IMO) with your interpretation.
Turning a Master of Many Styles from this into this is a travesty, and that's what you imply with stuff like this:
What's he doing now?"
"Don't know ... what? It... looks... like... Kung Pow? ooeeoooeeeoooeeee!"
Translation: it's not lockstep with my way of thinking so you're doing it wrong.
More like "Implying styles are cartoony parodies of actual martial arts styles and we should base class design off of that interpretation is wrong, let's not do that".
One thing about the 'martial maneuvers' ability being the brawler's iconic ability is that it is not really especially appropriate for brawlers-- it would be an interesting ability for any fighter related class. I could see it as an alternate fighter ability. If one is going to create a class called 'the brawler', that class should be able to do really cool stuff in a tavern brawl, like break a chair over someone's head and knock them out (sneak attack + improvised weapon).
How is a class with a parent class of fighter not a fighter related class ?
I know I say this a lot but stop saying 'But the class name is *blah* it has to *blerg*' because it really doesn't. The class should do what its designed to do and then get named something distinctive enough that its name isn't confusing in a stat block.
A successful tavern brawler usually a better stated higher level commoner then the rest of the npc classed tavern rats or maybe warrior who took improvised weapon things as opposed to skill focus Farming
The brawler here is not forcefully implied as a tavern ruffian although he could be. This is a person who Looks at his parent classes with a sneer. He takes the monks low gear combat style and rapid attacking but looks at the mysticism as something to be avoided. He takes the fighters good old fashioned elbow grease but scoffs at his reliance on weapons and heavy armor. We already have the swashbuckler pigeonholed into a boring umimaginative everyone is the same fluff wise class. You want him to be a tavern brawler.. Cool do it take the feats for it. Multi with rogue if you really want the sneak attack. Myself I'd rather play a monastery drop out, a feral jungle foundling, <This guy says more tarzan to me then any of the barbarian options.> A warrior interested in proving the superiority of the five adders death @#$% strike, a prize fighter who grew addicted to the near death rush and now seeks out monsters because humans just don't thrill him anymore. Honestly badass tavern lout could even be an archtype just like it is for barbarian and monks but anything so narrowly focused has no more place as a base class as a warrior who always wields a battleaxe and a dagger. Even barring all of that I think 4 out of the 10 base classes getting a precision damage based ability is more then a little excessive.
I guarantee that not everyone has the same image associations. I suppose you could be playing in a game where everyone says things like 'Howdy fellas I'm Sven the barbarian and this is Jim bob the inquisitor', and refers to themselves by class name but the very idea makes me gag a little.
Let's not let the "style X vs. style Y vs. you are trivializing styles" off-topic continue in this thread.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My point was that martial maneuvers, while an interesting ability for a brawler, is also an appropriate ability for the fighter class. There is nothing about it that says 'brawler'. The best classes have abilities that speak to the class's special flavor. Witches, for example, have hexes, achemists have mutagens and bombs, the magus, which is in a sense a wizard/fighter, has arcana that lets them cast spells and fight.
So the ability to walk up to a dragon without any training in grappling people, and pinning it against the wall successfully (Picking up improved and greater grapple, in game) doesn't sound like something a "brawler" might do? Picking up a shield you have never trained with, smashing it into someone's face, and then using it to block the attacks that follow it (taking shield proficiency and improved shield bash on the fly) doesn't sound like a "Brawler" thing?
Maybe it doesn't seem to fit in your opinion, but I think its a great ability for a brawler both thematically and mechanically (but sadly, with so few uses). YMMV.
I'd love to start talking archetypes. Mainly because as a fan of unarmed characters I still don't see good reasons to play this class and I'm hoping archetypes fix that.
|
|
What about for a Master of Many Styles archetype (with a different name), the ability to select style feats in place of bonus feats, the ability to expend only one use of Martial Maneuvers when getting feats from a style feat chain, and Fuse Styles in place of Brawler's Flurry? Perhaps a bonus to attack rolls while in a style in place of maneuver training and maybe have the AC bonus only apply while in styles as well? Just as some ideas.
I've recommended it. Others have as well. I also recommended calling it the Mixed Martial Artist.