Lead Designer
|
It may be a mistake to compare like elements as opposed to all elements. New martial and new magic option, if compared to each other, can balance off each other. Comparing the new options only to like options in core only further reinforces the systemic issues instead of assuaging them.
We do compare against all elements, it is why this job gets harder and harder with each book we put out. Where we can push, we do. What we want to avoid is invalidating our core rulebook by putting out obviously superior options in later books. Different and interesting options, yes. Vastly better, no. That does not mean that feats in later books can't be good.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
On another note, is it fair to conclude at this point that a great many of the complainers about Crane Wing were misapplying the fighting defensively rules? I've been trying to ask whether there is something I've missed here for days now and getting basically deafening silence when I ask for any other rules that might be at play other than the Combat section ones.I think that was only Aelryinth. I know he complained a lot of times, but he's not really representative of the other people who had a problem with Crane.
I personally agree with you on readied actions working (which of course eliminates all attacks but one), but you should also keep in mind that the text on the conditional trigger and when you needed the hand free also] changed in the errata.
He was the only one that engaged in a substantive debate about it, but even in only six or seven minutes skimming this thread in order to make this very post, I've counted sixteen separate posters referring to the idea that a lone Tyrannosaurus has no recourse whatsoever against Crane Wing. Quite a few more who referenced the idea that Crane Wing was totally impervious against one big attack, more generically... which doesn't even need ready actions to not be true, it simply needs a Large monster with superior reach.
(which a lot of one big attack monsters are)
This suggests that the misconception may indeed have been widespread. A T rex seems to just need to move after attacking in order to get in hits past Crane WIng, causing the Crane Wing guy to have to eat an AoO to close back in. Ends up trading one big attack (AoO or standard, with the other deflected) for one standard action attack and one AoO from the Crane guy each round, even without readying. Which is not a bad trade if you have a really big attack.
(A tactic that makes perfect sense for the T Rex or any other Large or larger one-big-hit monster, by the way. In fact, last time I fought a T rex it used exactly those tactics even though there was no Crane Wing. Ended up trading single standard attacks and AoOs (from the party when it moved away) for single standard attacks and AoOs (from the Rex, when the party closed back in), which is a lot better than trading full attacks when your foe has multiple attacks and you don't. And skirmish tactics are widespread in the animal kingdom).
Now, I might feel bad about an animal intelligence creature taking advantage of the init order with ready actions in order to make the trade two for two, but perhaps not an intelligent monster. Certainly not if the Crane Wing guy is pulling very similar handedness shenanigans with the init to fight two handed and still get deflections.
|
About power creep and imbalace.
Let's assume a game, which have classes that aren't balanced among them.
We have a class with power Ranking 3/10, a class with 5/10, a class with 9/10 and a class with 10/10.
Let's suppose a new book give options that give everybody a +1. That sounds like power creep, doesn't it?
Now let's suppose that book gives options to the class with 3/10 power ranking. Is it power creep? Is it now *worse* the game because it has a class with 4/10 power ranking to go with the 5/10, 9/10 and 10/10 classes?
That's not the point, though, at least not as Jason was describing it. It's about how you now "need" that new book in order to have the "real" game.
On another note, is it fair to conclude at this point that a great many of the complainers about Crane Wing were misapplying the fighting defensively rules? I've been trying to ask whether there is something I've missed here for days now and getting basically deafening silence when I ask for any other rules that might be at play other than the Combat section ones.I think that was only Aelryinth. I know he complained a lot of times, but he's not really representative of the other people who had a problem with Crane.
I personally agree with you on readied actions working (which of course eliminates all attacks but one), but you should also keep in mind that the text on the conditional trigger and when you needed the hand free also] changed in the errata.
He was the only one that engaged in a substantive debate about it, but even in only six or seven minutes skimming this thread in order to make this post, I've counted sixteen separate posters referring to the idea that a lone Tyrannosaurus has no recourse whatsoever against Crane Wing. Quite a few more who referenced the idea that Crane Wing was totally impervious against one big attack, more generically... which doesn't even need ready actions to not be true, it simply needs a Large monster with superior reach.
(which a lot of one big attack monsters are)
This suggests that the misconception may indeed have been widespread. A T rex seems to just need to move after attacking in order to get in hits past Crane WIng, causing the Crane Wing guy to have to eat an AoO to close back in. Ends up trading one big attack (AoO or standard, with the other deflected) for one standard action attack and one AoO from the Crane guy each round, even without readying. Which is not a bad trade if you have a really big attack.
(A tactic that makes perfect sense for the T Rex or any other Large or larger...
If you mean my claim, then that's the claim that a - Int skeletal t-rex could not harm my character, which is still true.
Also, I really like your tactic for the normal t-rex, but if it tries that, you just don't engage in melee at all that round, giving you the AoO still but then wasting its readied action and everything. And if the t-rex comes up with a plan around that plan...well at some point it's gone beyond animal intelligence.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It may be a mistake to compare like elements as opposed to all elements. New martial and new magic option, if compared to each other, can balance off each other. Comparing the new options only to like options in core only further reinforces the systemic issues instead of assuaging them.We do compare against all elements, it is why this job gets harder and harder with each book we put out. Where we can push, we do. What we want to avoid is invalidating our core rulebook by putting out obviously superior options in later books. Different and interesting options, yes. Vastly better, no. That does not mean that feats in later books can't be good.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
This design philosophy may be a mistake. If this is what you are truly striving for then that means you are trying to make new options that are equivalent, but err on the side of worse. The few things that do get through and are better like crane wing are then nerfed to the ground such that they are worse than core options.
The problems you talk about that were inherited from 3.5 can only get worse with this philosophy do to the nature of expanded options. Sure this means that new spells are try to be equivalent or weaker than core spells, but a spell that is highly situational has little opportunity cost for a spellcaster to use. Which means that no matter how bad new spells are, the overall power of spellcasters will increase. The more limited classes are stuck with an ever growing pool of sub-par feat and talent options. They do not move on the power scale while spellcasters just get farther and farther ahead.
Feats and talents would actually have to get stronger to keep up with spellcasters ever increasing pool of spells to choose from.
Pathfinder seems to have the exact opposite problem of 3.5; power seep. Each new book has on the average worse options than the books before it (trying to avoid power creep by erring on the side of worse when compared to all previous material). Spellcasters seem immune to this, because do to the nature of the opportunity cost to acquire spells, they are. They just get stronger and stronger.
People can be passionate without insulting other posters.Encouraging people to be constructive is one thing, but belittling their passion is bordering on personal insult in of itself.
They can, but I doubt you would tolerate that kind of behavior even if the topic was of a more somber nature like the conflicts in the middle east or the recent shooting at Purdue University.
There was no reason to insinuate that this being "just a game" was a reason to lower the vitriol. Comments like those are belittling and distract from the real issue.
And if the t-rex comes up with a plan around that plan...well at some point it's gone beyond animal intelligence.
Only if you read it in metagame terms. Yes, readying action, taking adventage of AOO rules, etc, is quite tactical. But a big animal with huge reach trying to take adventage from his size? That's not really that strange.
Maybe it should be the standard T-Rex attack combo, regardless of Crane Wing :P
And if the t-rex comes up with a plan around that plan...well at some point it's gone beyond animal intelligence.Only if you read it in metagame terms. Yes, readying action, taking adventage of AOO rules, etc, is quite tactical. But a big animal with huge reach trying to take adventage from his size? That's not really that strange.
Maybe it should be the standard T-Rex attack combo, regardless of Crane Wing :P
Oh, I agree. I think that having a t-rex standardly do the thing Coriat mentioned is totally legit, and cool (although I've played with enough different people that I know I'm on a far end towards liking that--many people I've seen would be very annoyed that the animal Int creature was being more tactical than they, a human, could think of).
But if the PCs use the correct counter that utterly annihilates that plan (which is to not go into melee with it when it does that), if the t-rex then on the fly comes up with a highly intelligent counter to that counter, that's where it would cross a line for me.
|
Lead Designer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That is a game we play with every option. We endeavor to get things around the same level, all things being equal in terms of cost and expected level of acquisition. We are not aiming to put out feats that are worse and worse, nor do we endeavor to put out spells that are worse and worse. We want them to be just as attractive, or in the case of rules that explore new directions, to be a viable and fun alternative. Like I said, we dont get it right every time, but that is the goal.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
But if the PCs use the correct counter that utterly annihilates that plan (which is to not go into melee with it when it does that), if the t-rex then on the fly comes up with a highly intelligent counter to that counter, that's where it would cross a line for me.
Well, given that as a Gargantuan creature it can just as easily move straight through your square (eating an AoO) as back off (eating the same AoO) a Crane Winger likely doesn't have enough personal control over where the T rex goes to be able to reliably implement this tactic. The Crane Winger can't even block lanes, and thus is not at all unlikely to have his hand forced if for example the dinosaur decides that a less punchy meal is better.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
That is a game we play with every option. We endeavor to get things around the same level, all things being equal in terms of cost and expected level of acquisition. We are not aiming to put out feats that are worse and worse, nor do we endeavor to put out spells that are worse and worse. We want them to be just as attractive, or in the case of rules that explore new directions, to be a viable and fun alternative. Like I said, we dont get it right every time, but that is the goal.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Can you explain, then, in what universe the errata'd Crane Wing is "as attractive" as its alternatives?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But if the PCs use the correct counter that utterly annihilates that plan (which is to not go into melee with it when it does that), if the t-rex then on the fly comes up with a highly intelligent counter to that counter, that's where it would cross a line for me.Well, given that as a Gargantuan creature it can just as easily move straight through your square (eating an AoO) as back off (eating the same AoO) a Crane Winger likely doesn't have enough personal control over where the T rex goes to be able to reliably implement this tactic. The Crane Winger can't even block lanes, and thus is not at all unlikely to have his hand forced if for example the dinosaur decides that a less punchy meal is better.
As long as it keeps readying an action, it never moves more than 40 feet. Unless you've got a medium armor halfling (which isn't impossible--I've seen one once in God's Market Gamble), nobody is going to actually be caught that way.
For every tactic the t-rex can use involving readying actions, there's an equivalent tactic that renders it useless if you break its expectations of what the readied trigger will be. And if the t-rex is mixing up its readied triggers and using all this highly advanced tactics, it's going to seem pretty fishy to most players (even me, and I'm on an extreme end towards likely that sort of stuff in general). Do you want your players to say:
"Well we had the t-rex well in hand, we thought. As far as brute strength, we had it outmatched. But the problem was, the t-rex's tactical genius was just more than all of ours combined. Every plan we came up with, the t-rex had already anticipated and prepared a countermeasure. In the end, we had no chance!"
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's not the point, though, at least not as Jason was describing it. It's about how you now "need" that new book in order to have the "real" game.About power creep and imbalace.
Let's assume a game, which have classes that aren't balanced among them.
We have a class with power Ranking 3/10, a class with 5/10, a class with 9/10 and a class with 10/10.
Let's suppose a new book give options that give everybody a +1. That sounds like power creep, doesn't it?
Now let's suppose that book gives options to the class with 3/10 power ranking. Is it power creep? Is it now *worse* the game because it has a class with 4/10 power ranking to go with the 5/10, 9/10 and 10/10 classes?
Why? If you don't own the errata'ed CRB where, say, improved trip no longer has combat expertise as a requisite, or combat expertise is actually a good feat itself and not a tax, you can't play with a new, errataed improved trip?
Does that means that if I never buy a new errataed version of Ultimate Combat, I'm allowed to use the old version of Crane Wing?
I don't see how you can make an errata to nerf martials, but making an errata to buff them would mean you are forcing people to buy new books
I still think this was a bad decision on the part of the design time. I believe I was the first to post on the UC preview blog post that showed off Crane Wing and I stated how it made me actually want to play a monk. I bought Ultimate Combat and now I have to convince whoever happens to GM to ignore the errata and go with what's in my book.
Crane wing is a good feat but only for specific builds - light or mobile melee combatants. And what's the big deal? You have to be fighting defensively and it only works on one attack. Meanwhile arcane casters are walking around with Mirror Images all of the place or Displacement and avoiding far more attacks than Crane Wing users and yet I don't see those spells getting nerfed.
I just see this as further evidence that non casters can't have nice stuff (barbarians excluded). Melee is already the toughest place to be and you've removed yet another tool that helps with survival. At high levels AC just doesn't cut it as a defense anymore.
Some of us actually like playing light, dex based duelist type warriors. Between the difficulty of getting dex to damage and now the nerf to crane wing, my last hope is the coming Swashbuckler which will probably get nerfed to uselessness if the present trend continues.
The minimum level you could take the feat should have been increased and/or it should have been banned in PFS and should have been the end of it.
Another downside of this particular development system is that spellcasters constantly get access to more resource options (clerics in new spells known for free, alchemists, magi and wizards in new spells known for a cost, the spontaneous casters in the form of scrolls and wands) with each new book, while the martials are still working under the original limitations in how many feats they can pick - there is no 'scroll' option for feats, so they can't pick up "situational" feats the way, say, a sorcerer will do.
One really, really exciting development on this front is the Brawler class ability that lets him pick up feats on the fly - I'd love to see a fighter archetype with a similar mechanic but without the focus on, well, brawling.
|
Lead Designer
|
Can you explain, then, in what universe the errata'd Crane Wing is "as attractive" as its alternatives?
We were shooting to make it on par with some of the other style feats in Ultimate Combat. Whether or not we were successful I think is the point of this thread. Its pretty clear most folks here feel we fell short of the mark.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Another downside of this particular development system is that spellcasters constantly get access to more resource options (clerics in new spells known for free, alchemists, magi and wizards in new spells known for a cost, the spontaneous casters in the form of scrolls and wands) with each new book, while the martials are still working under the original limitations in how many feats they can pick - there is no 'scroll' option for feats, so they can't pick up "situational" feats the way, say, a sorcerer will do.
One really, really exciting development on this front is the Brawler class ability that lets him pick up feats on the fly - I'd love to see a fighter archetype with a similar mechanic but without the focus on, well, brawling.
Technically, Ultimate Campaign does introduce rules for retraining feats, but the point still stands, since this option requires an additional book, and clearance from the GM.
But if the PCs use the correct counter that utterly annihilates that plan (which is to not go into melee with it when it does that), if the t-rex then on the fly comes up with a highly intelligent counter to that counter, that's where it would cross a line for me.Well, given that as a Gargantuan creature it can just as easily move straight through your square (eating an AoO) as back off (eating the same AoO) a Crane Winger likely doesn't have enough personal control over where the T rex goes to be able to reliably implement this tactic. The Crane Winger can't even block lanes, and thus is not at all unlikely to have his hand forced if for example the dinosaur decides that a less punchy meal is better.As long as it keeps readying an action, it never moves more than 40 feet. Unless you've got a medium armor halfling (which isn't impossible--I've seen one once in God's Market Gamble), nobody is going to actually be caught that way.
For every tactic the t-rex can use involving readying actions, there's an equivalent tactic that renders it useless if you break its expectations of what the readied trigger will be.
Ready isn't actually the centerpiece of this T rex's combat. Movement is (as it ought to be, flavorwise), and movement period is what is necessary for a reach monster to circumvent Crane Wing to begin with, since we've found that an attack of opportunity provoked by movement couldn't actually be deflected by Crane Wing at all (since if you provoke during a move action, you didn't get the chance to fight defensively yet). The opportunity to double up via a ready action is icing.
What I meant by forcing the monk's hand is that if the monk has no way to block the T rex's movement, he's just as likely to have to charge in to help another party member as he is likely to be able to keep his distance. He doesn't hold the initiative (in the non Dexterity check sense of the word) because he can't influence his foe's movement.
|
|
Does that means that if I never buy a new errataed version of Ultimate Combat, I'm allowed to use the old version of Crane Wing?
As has been noted by a number of people in the numerous threads on the topic - with varying amounts of defiance - you can do that whether you buy the new edition or not, as long as your GM allows it/you're not playing PFS.
I don't see how you can make an errata to nerf martials, but making an errata to buff them would mean you are forcing people to buy new books
Consider, if you will, the number of people who would insisted, prior to the errata, that you need to know about Crane Wing to make a decent defense-oriented martial character.
There's forcing and then there's forcing.
That is a game we play with every option. We endeavor to get things around the same level, all things being equal in terms of cost and expected level of acquisition. We are not aiming to put out feats that are worse and worse, nor do we endeavor to put out spells that are worse and worse. We want them to be just as attractive, or in the case of rules that explore new directions, to be a viable and fun alternative. Like I said, we dont get it right every time, but that is the goal.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
It's not the goal, but it is what happens. Especially if you look at every option and not just core. Power creep seems to be near the top of your priorities to avoid, that automatically means that new options err on the side worse (this is the concept of tolerance, you strive for perfect but try to control errors to a specific kind of outcome). It would almost be better to ignore options outside core and balance new options to only core (keyword being almost).
Regardless even if you succeeded at only making equivalent options, caster would still get stronger with a larger and larger pool of spells to have, while others have a limited amounts of tricks they can learn.
Even if that was somehow not an issue, by only making equivalent options, you reinforce the issues inherited from 3.5 instead of smoothing them over.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does that means that if I never buy a new errataed version of Ultimate Combat, I'm allowed to use the old version of Crane Wing?As has been noted by a number of people in the numerous threads on the topic - with varying amounts of defiance - you can do that whether you buy the new edition or not, as long as your GM allows it/you're not playing PFS.
I don't see how you can make an errata to nerf martials, but making an errata to buff them would mean you are forcing people to buy new booksConsider, if you will, the number of people who would insisted, prior to the errata, that you need to know about Crane Wing to make a decent defense-oriented martial character.
There's forcing and then there's forcing.
The only thing that has changed due to this errata is that now, you simply *can't* make a decent defense-oriented martial character. Is that really an improvement?
Can you explain, then, in what universe the errata'd Crane Wing is "as attractive" as its alternatives?We were shooting to make it on par with some of the other style feats in Ultimate Combat. Whether or not we were successful I think is the point of this thread. Its pretty clear most folks here feel we fell short of the mark.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Even if you didn't the mechanic of choosing one attack before it is rolled is really disruptive to play. Any character with that forces the GM to declare their attacks against them with what weapon and give the player time to respond with crane wing or not crane wing. As a GM I would just add the dodge bonus to AC against whatever attack would have hit, just to save time.
But if the PCs use the correct counter that utterly annihilates that plan (which is to not go into melee with it when it does that), if the t-rex then on the fly comes up with a highly intelligent counter to that counter, that's where it would cross a line for me.Well, given that as a Gargantuan creature it can just as easily move straight through your square (eating an AoO) as back off (eating the same AoO) a Crane Winger likely doesn't have enough personal control over where the T rex goes to be able to reliably implement this tactic. The Crane Winger can't even block lanes, and thus is not at all unlikely to have his hand forced if for example the dinosaur decides that a less punchy meal is better.As long as it keeps readying an action, it never moves more than 40 feet. Unless you've got a medium armor halfling (which isn't impossible--I've seen one once in God's Market Gamble), nobody is going to actually be caught that way.
For every tactic the t-rex can use involving readying actions, there's an equivalent tactic that renders it useless if you break its expectations of what the readied trigger will be.
Ready isn't actually the centerpiece of this T rex's combat. Movement is (as it ought to be, flavorwise), and movement period is what is necessary for a reach monster to circumvent Crane Wing to begin with, since we've shown that an attack of opportunity provoked by movement can't actually be deflected by Crane Wing at all (since if you had to take a move action, you didn't get the chance to fight defensively yet). The opportunity to double up via a ready action is icing.
What I meant by forcing the monk's hand is that if the monk has no way to block the T rex's movement, he's just as likely to have to charge in to help another party member as he is likely to be able to keep his distance. He doesn't hold the initiative (in the non Dexterity check sense of the word) because he can't influence his foe's movement..
Ah, but then all those claims of the Crane guy soloing the t-rex are probably not assuming allies that force the Craner's hand.
Alone, the Craner will not lose unless the t-rex switches to grappling without its Grab ability (or the Craner makes a tactical error), and while I'm all for the tactics you've described so far, having it use those stubby hands to get into a regular grapple because the GM knows it's the only thing that will work seems extremely metagamey for an animal to do (I will point out though that this is not one of the tactics you brought up, just one I've seen from others).
(although I've played with enough different people that I know I'm on a far end towards liking that--many people I've seen would be very annoyed that the animal Int creature was being more tactical than they, a human, could think of).
Those people probably haven't seen predators in action. They tend to be excellently proficient at exploiting their own natural advantages in close quarters with prey, even though they may be significantly less well-adapted to more recent challenges like dodging rifle bullets ;)
The only thing that has changed due to this errata is that now, you simply *can't* make a decent defense-oriented martial character. Is that really an improvement?
To be fair, you can still crank AC, but you won't have many options and just cranking your AC tends to be a little boring since its a passive and not active or reactive thing. Woot! I got AC. Now you can't hit me. The most fun out of it really is getting really excited your not being hit much, which isn't for everyone, and the fact you get to keep moving, which you were kinda' hoping to do in the first place. Of course your saves might still be pitiful, and you might not have DR, and you still need a chunk of HP since there are a lot of ways to hurt someone. Again, not many options with those either, in particular active and reactive options instead of passive.
That is a game we play with every option. We endeavor to get things around the same level, all things being equal in terms of cost and expected level of acquisition. We are not aiming to put out feats that are worse and worse, nor do we endeavor to put out spells that are worse and worse. We want them to be just as attractive, or in the case of rules that explore new directions, to be a viable and fun alternative. Like I said, we dont get it right every time, but that is the goal.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead DesignerIt's not the goal, but it is what happens. Especially if you look at every option and not just core. Power creep seems to be near the top of your priorities to avoid, that automatically means that new options err on the side worse (this is the concept of tolerance, you strive for perfect but try to control errors to a specific kind of outcome). It would almost be better to ignore options outside core and balance new options to only core (keyword being almost).
Regardless even if you succeeded at only making equivalent options, caster would still get stronger with a larger and larger pool of spells to have, while others have a limited amounts of tricks they can learn.
Even if that was somehow not an issue, by only making equivalent options, you reinforce the issues inherited from 3.5 instead of smoothing them over.
Hmm, this is an interesting perspective. Do you believe, then, that the Brawler (and the Forgotten Trick Ninja I guess) are innately the most powerful melee classes then, since they can choose their feats even more on the fly than casters choose spells?
Random thought: What happens if the rogue gets a rogue talent that's the equivalent of the Brawler maneuver feature, but instead of combat feats he can pick up skill or general feats?
...I just invented rogue paragon surge, didn't I.
Hmm, this is an interesting perspective. Do you believe, then, that the Brawler (and the Forgotten Trick Ninja I guess) are innately the most powerful melee classes then, since they can choose their feats even more on the fly than casters choose spells?
That infers feats are as good as spells.
I don't see what that has to do with what Marthkus said though. Edit: Ahh! I see now.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Jason, I understand why the design team doesn't want to invalidate the CRB.
But what if you published options that improved or at least, synergized really well with Core options (like the new Superstition-related Rage Powers and Two-Weapon feint) and options that we completely different and still good (like Style feats, including CW). Each books has hundreds of feats, archetypes, weapons, etc...
I'd love to see good feats that improve something other than DPR. Martial characters (especially Fighters) got lots of new options to raise their numbers, but very rarely got the ability to do something new... Which is big disappointment for me. I'd love to see Fighter players actually taking something other than Weapon Focus/Specialization for getting more versatility and less punch.
Besides, the CRB is probably the book with the widest power gap between classes. It has Wizards, Druids and Clerics right next to Rogues, Monks and Fighters... Rogues really could use some (much) better Rogue Talents, since the ones from the CRB are so underwhelming, to put it lightly... Fighters could get some lateral increase in power too.
Would it be possible to have an errata that, for example, gives Fighters and Paladins 4 skill points per level instead of two? That doesn't change the word count, doesn't force people to buy new books any more than any other errata and would certainly please many players. It wouldn't be much of a power boost to them as much as it would be a good way to promote variety and versatility in martial characters.
Now this is just a dream of mine... But wouldn't it be cool if every class that is not a Int-based full caster (Wizard, Witch and Arcanist) had at least 4+Int skill point? 2 skill points is just not enough be good at any skill role you want... At best the character is mediocre at one thing.
Ah, but then all those claims of the Crane guy soloing the t-rex are probably not assuming allies that force the Craner's hand.
Alone, the Craner will not lose [...]
Maybe not, but I'm actually okay with even a low level monk being able to just stay the heck away from a T rex and survive. Got to leave the PCs some hope when you roll high on the random monster table, after all, and there's nothing wrong with encouraging people to keep their distance from gigantic carnivorous dinosaurs.
The monk following the tactics you prescribe will not win, either, though - not with 100% Crane provided immunity - since he cannot close with a moving T rex without suffering a (non-deflectable) AoO. Possibly two non deflectable attacks if the T rex is readying another one.
I agree you might be able to keep your distance and survive that way (not necessarily the same as winning) but we've discovered that there is actually no way for a Crane monk to engage a T-rex in melee and get 100% deflection of the T rex's attacks, if a monster with a high speed, only one attack, and a racial Run feat does anything but stand still right next to him trading full attacks.
(hint - those three things should suggest that a T rex is instinctively a mobile combatant)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How about letting a Monk crane winger spend a ki point to use CW the old way (deflect an attack after the fact) ? That way the monk can't do it all day and non-monks can only use the +4 dodge bonus version.
Ah, but then all those claims of the Crane guy soloing the t-rex are probably not assuming allies that force the Craner's hand.
Alone, the Craner will not lose [...]
Maybe not, but I'm actually okay with even a low level monk being able to just stay the heck away from a T rex and survive. Got to leave the PCs some hope when you roll high on the random monster table, after all, and there's nothing wrong with encouraging people to keep their distance from gigantic carnivorous dinosaurs.
The monk following the tactics you prescribe will not win, either, though - not with 100% Crane provided immunity - since he cannot close with a moving T rex without suffering a (non-deflectable) AoO. Possibly two non deflectable attacks if the T rex is readying another one.
I agree you might be able to keep your distance and survive that way (not necessarily the same as winning) but we've discovered that there is actually no way for a Crane monk to engage a T-rex in melee and get 100% deflection of the T rex's attacks, if a monster with a high speed, only one attack, and a racial Run feat does anything but stand still right next to him trading full attacks.
(hint - those three things should suggest that a T rex is instinctively a mobile combatant)
Crane Wing doesn't say anything about melee combat. If the rex wants to stay afar, then you can pelt it with thrown weapons until it dies or runs away. If you can automatically rout or kill a t-rex with a level 1 character or whatever, then that's really good enough. It doesn't matter if you forced the rex to flee, you still won the fight.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just got an idea. It just came up now, and I haven't checked any math about it, but I want to share it anyways.
What about if Crane Wing gives you +4 AC vs a single oponent, until you are hit in a given round? Say you have 27 AC. With Crane Wing, you have AC 31 vs a single oponent. If that guy hits you with his first attack, you have your Crane Wing down for the rest of the round. But if you keep they guy at bay, and he keeps missing, you get the +4 to every attack from him (until he hits). That's an improvement over the current +4 vs a single attack, but not as powerful as instant-miss
Crane Wing doesn't say anything about melee combat. If the rex wants to stay afar, then you can pelt it with thrown weapons until it dies or runs away. If you can automatically rout or kill a t-rex with a level 1 character or whatever, then that's really good enough. It doesn't matter if you forced the rex to flee, you still won the fight.Ah, but then all those claims of the Crane guy soloing the t-rex are probably not assuming allies that force the Craner's hand.
Alone, the Craner will not lose [...]
Maybe not, but I'm actually okay with even a low level monk being able to just stay the heck away from a T rex and survive. Got to leave the PCs some hope when you roll high on the random monster table, after all, and there's nothing wrong with encouraging people to keep their distance from gigantic carnivorous dinosaurs.
The monk following the tactics you prescribe will not win, either, though - not with 100% Crane provided immunity - since he cannot close with a moving T rex without suffering a (non-deflectable) AoO. Possibly two non deflectable attacks if the T rex is readying another one.
I agree you might be able to keep your distance and survive that way (not necessarily the same as winning) but we've discovered that there is actually no way for a Crane monk to engage a T-rex in melee and get 100% deflection of the T rex's attacks, if a monster with a high speed, only one attack, and a racial Run feat does anything but stand still right next to him trading full attacks.
(hint - those three things should suggest that a T rex is instinctively a mobile combatant)
The problem is the T-Rex. Give him trample, or overrun, or a fearing roar, or a tail sweep that stagger, dunno.
High CR creatures with nothing more than a pile of hit points and a big damaging attack are quite lackluster, frankly. Even if you fix C-W so it's not an auto-rout for him, it's a bland big monster with a big mouth and a bunch of HP, nothing else. A Potion of fly also defeat him, and that's something you can buy at level 1 with a trait (Rich parent).
You'd need to declare your Crane Wing target each round and track two different AC counts depending on what enemy is attacking you, and your AC count could also change mid-attack chain if the opponent gets lucky on his first strike.
That seems a bit... Fiddly?
You'd need to declare your Crane Wing target each round and track two different AC counts depending on what enemy is attacking you, and your AC count could also change mid-attack chain if the opponent gets lucky on his first strike.
That seems a bit... Fiddly?
It's not more fiddly than the current errata'ed version, which does the same but against a single attack
It's not more fiddly than the current errata'ed version, which does the same but against a single attack
Absolutely, though I like to think we're aiming higher than the current version of Crane Wing :)
If you can automatically rout or kill a t-rex with a level 1 character or whatever, then that's really good enough. It doesn't matter if you forced the rex to flee, you still won the fight.
If you still think this is actually an automatic victory for a level 1 Crane Wing guy using any tactic, I'll be happy to run a little pbp encounter for you and we can test the assertion.
(*or level 2 or whatever level MOMS gets Crane Wing)
|
I've been reading this thread since it started and have noticed some interesting points aside from the changing of Crane Wing.
It seems many people are looking at builds as if they were looking at the Matrix Code!
We all know this is a game that involves numbers, and that game mechanics allow a steady flow and progress to the game play. But it seems many forget that is also a Role-playing game.
By this I mean it's not just about numbers and what you can do, but about the feel and style as well.
Some builds, characters, feats, or powers maybe more powerful than others in many scenarios, yet many of the feats and builds are not there to just be better or more powerful than the last. It's to create flavor for each and every character that is brought to life by a player.
My flavor, for example, is a Barbarian I play in PFS. He is currently level 7 and I have him wearing +1 Hide armor and his Dex is 16 (with a belt of Dex +2). Now I know I could go get me some nice shiny mitheral full-plate and have a much better AC (It's currently 20 with his armor dex, a amulet of +1 Nat armor, and a ring of protection +1), but that would not give the roleplaying flavor of this character.
Sometimes it's about the style and flavor over the mechanics and numbers.
As for Crane Wing I feel the change is fine. At least it still fits the flavor of the Style it was intending to express.
It's not more fiddly than the current errata'ed version, which does the same but against a single attackAbsolutely, though I like to think we're aiming higher than the current version of Crane Wing :)
Another option I thought, is to make CW deflect the attack BEFORE the roll is made.
It still will cause issues with the people who doesn't like the T-Rex being ass-kicked, I guess. But it tone down a lot the effect of the old Crane Wing.
EDIT: the easiest solution, is to allow the +4 to be declared AFTER the roll is made. But the development team seem to be against this kind of roll alteration, as if the roll itself is part of the gameworld and once the dice says you are hit, you are hit.
but that would not give the roleplaying flavor of this character.
On the other hand, you could choose not to give up roleplaying flavor and still get the mithral full plate. You could for example, describe him as wearing pelts over the mithral full plate. Animal Furs are PFS legal too, or at least last I checked.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
We recognize that there are some aspects of the game that are not "even" or "balanced" when looked at from certain perspectives. The bard is just not as good at melee combat as the fighter. The cleric is no match for the rogue in terms of skills. Etc. The core set up certain paradigms when it came to some of these relationships. When we are releasing new material, we keep these relationships in mind. If we ignore them and start changing the balance in books further down the road, we end up with a great deal of conceptual drift and, depending on the area of drift, some pretty bad issues of power creep.
Jason, you are, without a doubt, one of the most respectful game designers (of any game) I've ever had the pleasure to interact with in a social forum. You are able to maintain a respectful air through all sorts of nonsense that other devs lose their temper at.
So it shocks me when you use such an example that is so disrespectful.
No one is arguing that "Clerics need to be as good with skills as Rogues" or any other kind of nonsense like that.
When you say your team really is listening to and considering complaints, it's this sort of answer that leads people to not believe you.
The argument has never been, "Wizards fight better than Fighters, and therefore Fighters are worse than Wizards."
The argument has always been, "A Caster who is casting is far more effective and useful in almost all situations than a Non-Caster who is fighting."
So when you say that your goal is to maintain the balance established by the Core Rulebook, you are in essence saying that, "Casters will always be the superior choice over non-Casters," not because you have any personal thing against non-Casters, but because that is the balance that is offered in the Core Rulebook.
Which is incredibly disheartening for those of us who want to see non-Casters get fun and useful abilities.
Lets just take the rogue for example. I could, quite easily, put out a book that gave the rogue full BAB. Now new players who want to play a rogue will need that book, in addition to the core, unless they want to be told over and over again by other players and the community as a whole that they are playing a poor alternative. I could, instead, reprint the core with a rogue with a full BAB. Now, everyone would need to pick up a new core rulebook. In either case, I am making decisions for your table (and wallet) through my design choices. Meanwhile, calls of power creep and a stealth new edition will run rampant, none of which is good for the game as a whole.
I just wanted to add that I think it's absolutely hilarious that you chose to pick the Rogue for your above example.
Because between the Ninja, the Alchemist, and the classes in the upcoming Advanced Class Guide, you have already done exactly what you claim to not want to do.
I've been reading this thread since it started and have noticed some interesting points aside from the changing of Crane Wing.
It seems many people are looking at builds as if they were looking at the Matrix Code!
We all know this is a game that involves numbers, and that game mechanics allow a steady flow and progress to the game play. But it seems many forget that is also a Role-playing game.
By this I mean it's not just about numbers and what you can do, but about the feel and style as well.
Some builds, characters, feats, or powers maybe more powerful than others in many scenarios, yet many of the feats and builds are not there to just be better or more powerful than the last. It's to create flavor for each and every character that is brought to life by a player.
My flavor, for example, is a Barbarian I play in PFS. He is currently level 7 and I have him wearing +1 Hide armor and his Dex is 16 (with a belt of Dex +2). Now I know I could go get me some nice shiny mitheral full-plate and have a much better AC (It's currently 20 with his armor dex, a amulet of +1 Nat armor, and a ring of protection +1), but that would not give the roleplaying flavor of this character.
Sometimes it's about the style and flavor over the mechanics and numbers.
As for Crane Wing I feel the change is fine. At least it still fits the flavor of the Style it was intending to express.
This is a mechanics discussion in the Rules forum; your argument doesn't seem particularly relevant here. Game mechanics do not prevent roleplaying, and roleplaying is not an excuse to allow blatant power inequalities to exist in a game system.
Lets just take the rogue for example. I could, quite easily, put out a book that gave the rogue full BAB. Now new players who want to play a rogue will need that book, in addition to the core, unless they want to be told over and over again by other players and the community as a whole that they are playing a poor alternative. I could, instead, reprint the core with a rogue with a full BAB. Now, everyone would need to pick up a new core rulebook. In either case, I am making decisions for your table (and wallet) through my design choices. Meanwhile, calls of power creep and a stealth new edition will run rampant, none of which is good for the game as a whole.
Ah, but you don't need to rewrite the rogue.
Instead, you could give an archetype (or Alternate class of Rogue) that has full bab.Or a Rogue feat/trick that increases hit chance (emulating better BAB) when making sneak attack (full BAB adds hit bonus).
Or a Rogue feat/trick that adds extra attack when making sneak attacks making them fight better (because full BAB adds +1 attack).
There are a phrethla of ideas that could be done in this idea/concept. No need to limit yourself with just a rewrite of rogue to accomplish this.
To be fair, even in the worst case situation, the new rogue class is online (as you let it be). Unless the kid has no internet.
It's not more fiddly than the current errata'ed version, which does the same but against a single attackAbsolutely, though I like to think we're aiming higher than the current version of Crane Wing :)Another option I thought, is to make CW deflect the attack BEFORE the roll is made.
It still will cause issues with the people who doesn't like the T-Rex being ass-kicked, I guess. But it tone down a lot the effect of the old Crane Wing.
EDIT: the easiest solution, is to allow the +4 to be declared AFTER the roll is made. But the development team seem to be against this kind of roll alteration, as if the roll itself is part of the gameworld and once the dice says you are hit, you are hit.
Wouldn't you be better off simply having Shield cast on you, since Shield gives you +4AC against everything, all the time, rather than just one person, if you declare it ahead of time?
Wouldn't you be better off simply having Shield cast on you, since Shield gives you +4AC against everything, all the time, rather than just one person, if you declare it ahead of time?It's not more fiddly than the current errata'ed version, which does the same but against a single attackAbsolutely, though I like to think we're aiming higher than the current version of Crane Wing :)Another option I thought, is to make CW deflect the attack BEFORE the roll is made.
It still will cause issues with the people who doesn't like the T-Rex being ass-kicked, I guess. But it tone down a lot the effect of the old Crane Wing.
EDIT: the easiest solution, is to allow the +4 to be declared AFTER the roll is made. But the development team seem to be against this kind of roll alteration, as if the roll itself is part of the gameworld and once the dice says you are hit, you are hit.
Shield is a shield bonus. I try to have both, but that's besides the point. If you are asking for a feat that gives +4 dodge, all the time, that's way too much, it's impossible that a feat like that pass the Developer's veto.
Shield is a shield bonus. I try to have both, but that's besides the point. If you are asking for a feat that gives +4 dodge, all the time, that's way too much, it's impossible that a feat like that pass the Developer's veto.Wouldn't you be better off simply having Shield cast on you, since Shield gives you +4AC against everything, all the time, rather than just one person, if you declare it ahead of time?It's not more fiddly than the current errata'ed version, which does the same but against a single attackAbsolutely, though I like to think we're aiming higher than the current version of Crane Wing :)Another option I thought, is to make CW deflect the attack BEFORE the roll is made.
It still will cause issues with the people who doesn't like the T-Rex being ass-kicked, I guess. But it tone down a lot the effect of the old Crane Wing.
EDIT: the easiest solution, is to allow the +4 to be declared AFTER the roll is made. But the development team seem to be against this kind of roll alteration, as if the roll itself is part of the gameworld and once the dice says you are hit, you are hit.
Crane Wing can only be used by people who are either unarmed, or only wielding a weapon in one hand...that is, people who cannot carry a shield, and thus will not have a shield bonus. So even with this new version of Crane Wing that you propose, they will be objectively worse than a guy with a magical shield, or anybody affected by a Shield Spell (for example, an Eidolon).
I posted this earlier in one of the other Crane threads, but I'd like to post it here now.
I built a Halfling Druid(no dips) with the full Crane feat line, along with the Halfling feats of Cautious Fighter(+2 AC when fighting defensively) & Uncanny Defense(+1/2 FD bonus on REF) for my players to go against. He also had Feral Combat Training to apply this style with a Full Natural Attack sequence. He was made to synergize his FD bonuses, and make the most out of Crane while Wild Shaped.
But long story short, this is my assessment of new Crane.
Crane Style itself is still a very appealing option. It significantly lowers the AB penalty of Fighting Defensively and ups the bonus. In conjunction with Cautious Fighter and acrobatics ranks, Fighting Defensively was very powerful, netting a near constant +6 AC a turn is pretty sweet. I imagine, in conjunction with other feats/options, Crane Can still be used.
Wing was nearly useless though. First, the one turn the NPC used a Full Defense to actually guarantee the deflect, the party took the turn to position around the Crane User for flanks next turn and buff since he couldn't threaten.
When just fighting defensively... The extra "deflection AC" just slowed down the game. It meant I had to designate rolls ahead of time, and slow down my players turn whenever I designated an attack. And when your AC is so high anyways that they need a 20 anyways, didn't make a difference at all in any way shape or form.
Riposte, was more automatic, but otherwise the same. It's just an AoO for an attack against you. Really all their is too it, still suffering the basic problem of AoOs in that you need the tax of Combat Reflexes if you want it to not shut down your ability to threaten your opponents. I didn't get stronger from the new rule set imo, not did it get weaker.
At the end of things, I can see people still taking Crane Style, but I doubt I'll ever see anyone take Crane Wing & Riposte without getting them for free. Especially when they can just take Combat Expertise.
I've said this a few times now but it bears repeating: I think a lot of people are "wow'ed" by the +4 Dodge bonus and missing the free hand requirement. Once you're past the low levels you're better off with the basic Crane feat and a magic shield if you want AC, or dropping Crane style entirely and using Snake Style instead - your AC will be similar to Crane Style/Wing/Riposte, you'll spend less feats, and you'll be getting a lot more AoOs.