Here's something to consider houseruling in if you feel that the original was too powerful, but the nerf went too far.
1) Return it to automatic activation on the first successful hit.
2) Scale the effect to the user's BAB, with Monk levels counting as full BAB. It would provide +1 AC against that attack for every 2 BAB (minimum +2 bonus) until +9 BAB, when it provides the auto-deflect.
3) Add the caveat that a Natural 20 cannot be deflected, but does use up Crane Wing for that turn if it hasn't been already.
|
Riposte works the same as it always has, except it will be used less often because Wing is now less reliable.
Actually, this is not strictly true.
Crane Riposte: With the changes made to Crane Wing, how does Crane Riposte work?
While the feat still reduced your penalty when fighting defensively, there is a change to the text the follows.Update: Page 93, in the Crane Riposte feat, in the benefits paragraph, change the second sentence to read as follows: Whenever you are fighting defensively, and you use Crane Wing to add a dodge bonus against one attack, that attack provokes an attack of opportunity from you if it misses. In addition, when you deflect an attack using Crane Wing while taking the total defense action, you may make an attack of opportunity against that opponent (even though you could not normally do so while taking the total defense action).
Emphasis mine.
This wording does not include a stipulation that the AOO is only generated when Crane Wing deflects an attack that would normally have missed. It only says that you get an AOO when an attack misses after you use Crane Wing to get a dodge bonus against an attack. So technically speaking all you have to do is use Crane Wing against an attack that already has a super low chance to hit, and you get an AOO from Riposte. For High AC builds where it was harder to trigger the old Crane Wing (because it could only be used on attacks that would hit), Crane Riposte will have a significantly higher trigger rate than before if you use Crane Wing this way.
Of course, this is counter to the intention of Crane Wing, which is to deflect attacks that could hit. And really, if this is how you're going to have to use Crane Wing to make Crane Riposte effective, you might as well go for Snake Style instead.
Well, that's a little bit of an offensive boost then, but it still comes at the expense of defense and it's still inferior offensively to Snake Style.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree, the offensive boost of Crane Riposte does not compensate for how useless Crane Wing has become for a defensive ability. I still argue that it would be best to allow the Crane Wing dodge bonus to be applied retroactively.
In my opinion a non-scaling +4 Dodge bonus does not compensate for the feat investment and especially the free hand requirement, even if it was reactive instead of preemptive.
I agree, the offensive boost of Crane Riposte does not compensate for how useless Crane Wing has become for a defensive ability. I still argue that it would be best to allow the Crane Wing dodge bonus to be applied retroactively.In my opinion a non-scaling +4 Dodge bonus does not compensate for the feat investment and especially the free hand requirement, even if it was reactive instead of preemptive.
I'm not so sure about that. It seems good if you can do it reactively. +4 AC is a bunch lot, and activating it reactively you are almost assured to have a free AOO per turn.
Here's something to consider houseruling in if you feel that the original was too powerful, but the nerf went too far.
1) Return it to automatic activation on the first successful hit.
2) Scale the effect to the user's BAB, with Monk levels counting as full BAB. It would provide +1 AC against that attack for every 2 BAB (minimum +2 bonus) until +9 BAB, when it provides the auto-deflect.
3) Add the caveat that a Natural 20 cannot be deflected, but does use up Crane Wing for that turn if it hasn't been already.
And how would you defeat vital strikes and charges, which this ability completely nerfs? The Vital Strike chain is longer and has a higher investment then Crane Wing!
==Aelryinth
And yet, you could say the same thing about all the martial feat lines.
Which is not to say Vital Strike couldn't do with some upgrades.
But, you know, for monsters? Vital strike works just fine!
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's something to consider houseruling in if you feel that the original was too powerful, but the nerf went too far.
1) Return it to automatic activation on the first successful hit.
2) Scale the effect to the user's BAB, with Monk levels counting as full BAB. It would provide +1 AC against that attack for every 2 BAB (minimum +2 bonus) until +9 BAB, when it provides the auto-deflect.
3) Add the caveat that a Natural 20 cannot be deflected, but does use up Crane Wing for that turn if it hasn't been already.
And how would you defeat vital strikes and charges, which this ability completely nerfs? The Vital Strike chain is longer and has a higher investment then Crane Wing!
==Aelryinth
Anyone unfortunate enough to have spent feats on Vital Strike can still try to get their full attack in, like everyone else. Likewise, the mounted character can move up and take his full attack.
I don't see the problem here. A charge specialist has a plethora of other things that cause him problems, from difficult terrain to flying enemies to simple obstacles.
Don't send Gendarmes after the Monk, send pouncing Barbarians instead. Fluff them as elite assault troops or what have you.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not so sure about that. It seems good if you can do it reactively. +4 AC is a bunch lot, and activating it reactively you are almost assured to have a free AOO per turn.
I'd agree if it wasn't for the free hand requirement. That +4 AC I gain on one attack? I can gain the same or higher AC benefit on ALL attacks against me simply by carrying a shield - no feat investment required.
If I really want the "attack of opportunity on a miss" benefit I can instead go for Snake Fang, which is not limited to a single AoO per round. If 20 people miss me I can take 20 AoOs if my dexterity modifier is high enough.
I'm not so sure about that. It seems good if you can do it reactively. +4 AC is a bunch lot, and activating it reactively you are almost assured to have a free AOO per turn.I'd agree if it wasn't for the free hand requirement. That +4 AC I gain on one attack? I can gain the same or higher AC benefit on ALL attacks against me simply by carrying a shield - no feat investment required.
If I really want the "attack of opportunity on a miss" benefit I can instead go for Snake Fang, which is not limited to a single AoO per round. If 20 people miss me I can take 20 AoOs if my dexterity modifier is high enough.
Hmmm... Snake Style + Ludicrously high AC + Mythic Combat Reflexes...
Hmmm... Snake Style + Ludicrously high AC + Mythic Combat Reflexes...
I like to think it would look somewhat like this.
Hmmm... Snake Style + Ludicrously high AC + Mythic Combat Reflexes...I like to think it would look somewhat like this.
Me thinks a Mythic Monk with an at-will Simulacrum SLA vs a Mythic MoMS with Crane, Snake, Dragon and possibly Panther style.
Monks generally don't use shields, so not being able to carry one doesn't seem like a big deal for them. If you aren’t a Monk and really love AC you can carry a shield in one hand and use Crane Wing with the other. A PC with caster levels or UMD and a wand of Shield could also get a +4 shield bonus to AC without carrying a shield. So could a Summoner, come to think of it (I happen to play a Monk1/Summoner13 in one game)
The prereqs for Crane Wing aren't a lot different from those for the second feat in any of the other unarmed combat styles. If anything they seem a little more lax than some. I can't understand why somebody building a defensively focused PC would get too upset about needing to take Dodge. All styles require a Style feat, and Crane Style seems at least as good as many others.
All in all the crane chain changes remind me very much on some changes done to one ship in Eve Online.
There once was a ship in eve that was called drake. it didn't do too much damage but man could it tank. Despite being a cheap ship you could fit it in a way that it could survive damage that would shred some bigger ships and that permanently for infinite time.
After some time the devs decided that this ship was to good at tanking, they nerfed its tanking abilities quite a lot and increased its damage instead. In the end you had a ship that was not special any more but was very similar to others of its class. It could do some damage, take some damage but people wanting a good tank had to look elsewhere.
And if you complained on the nerf someone would show up and insist that it's a buff not a nerf because now you can deal more damage. But no body used the drake for damage dealing. But at least their weapon range was incredible. So you could attack enemies from afar, taking some out before they got into range and hope that your reduced tank would still suffice.
Some time later the kind of weapons the drake used were nerfed. Their range was reduced. Since then I never again used the drake for any kind of combat activity. Is was reduced to a pure utility craft.
But all that has been some time ago. And I completely quit Eve in the meantime.
I'm not so sure about that. It seems good if you can do it reactively. +4 AC is a bunch lot, and activating it reactively you are almost assured to have a free AOO per turn.I'd agree if it wasn't for the free hand requirement. That +4 AC I gain on one attack? I can gain the same or higher AC benefit on ALL attacks against me simply by carrying a shield - no feat investment required.
but if you cast Shield, youbhave both +4. Plus a free hand instead of a shield opens for some otions. Like dervish Dancing, posibility to cast spells, the monk Wis to AC, ability to use scrolls/potions with your free hand, spellstrike... that's not counting the money you don't spend in your magical shield.
If I really want the "attack of opportunity on a miss" benefit I can instead go for Snake Fang, which is not limited to a single AoO per round. If 20 people miss me I can take 20 AoOs if my dexterity modifier is high enough.
yes, but you have to max a skill, sense motive.
The investment for snake style may be a bit higher than crane style, but snake is much better in terms of offensive capability.
Crane was attractive as a defensive option and while wing isn't completely useless now, it's switch mostly makes it an AoO trigger for riposte.
If I really want the "attack of opportunity on a miss" benefit I can instead go for Snake Fang, which is not limited to a single AoO per round. If 20 people miss me I can take 20 AoOs if my dexterity modifier is high enough.yes, but you have to max a skill, sense motive.
And maxing Sense Motive is a bad thing.... why?
And yet, you could say the same thing about all the martial feat lines.
Which is not to say Vital Strike couldn't do with some upgrades.
But, you know, for monsters? Vital strike works just fine!
==Aelryinth
Counters aren't bad. Everything doesn't have to be effective against everything else.
Or should we get rid of Fire Immunity because of casters that invest heavily in fire damage? They spent a lot of feats, right?
If you can't do ranged attacks, can't do multiple melee attacks, can't do magic, have no allies, and otherwise can only do ONE THING then you deserve to do badly. It's your own dang fault for making an overly specialized character.
And if PFS has too many enemies like this, then that's their fault and it shouldn't change the rest of the game.
But I could see it changing to adding 4+Character Level to your AC against the first melee attack on you. That makes it very hard to beat, but not unbeatable if you have the right resources.
There ARE feats that overcome fire immunity. Which is hilarious, because you can take a feat that overcomes a magical innate ability, since you can't buy fire immunity with a feat.
And this whole discussion is about feat parity. Everyone is complaining about the nerfing of Crane Wing, but nobody is complaining about how it utterly stomps on Vital Strike, and all Standard action attacks, or all monsters with only one attack.
And they are repeatedly ignoring the fact that 'full attack monsters and PC's' are controllable by the party and the player, with good tactics, feats, condition infliction, or spells.
'Ooooo, the Vital Strike guy can just try to get his full attack off, like everyone else who gets shut down.' I was thinking more along the lines of "Crane WIng automatically reduces the damage multiplier for Vital Strike by one step, but does not otherwise deflect the attack."
==Aelryinth
And yet, you could say the same thing about all the martial feat lines.
Which is not to say Vital Strike couldn't do with some upgrades.
But, you know, for monsters? Vital strike works just fine!
==Aelryinth
Counters aren't bad. Everything doesn't have to be effective against everything else.
Or should we get rid of Fire Immunity because of casters that invest heavily in fire damage? They spent a lot of feats, right?
If you can't do ranged attacks, can't do multiple melee attacks, can't do magic, have no allies, and otherwise can only do ONE THING then you deserve to do badly. It's your own dang fault for making an overly specialized character.
And if PFS has too many enemies like this, then that's their fault and it shouldn't change the rest of the game.
But I could see it changing to adding 4+Character Level to your AC against the first melee attack on you. That makes it very hard to beat, but not unbeatable if you have the right resources.
There ARE feats that overcome fire immunity. Which is hilarious, because you can take a feat that overcomes a magical innate ability, since you can't buy fire immunity with a feat.
And this whole discussion is about feat parity. Everyone is complaining about the nerfing of Crane Wing, but nobody is complaining about how it utterly stomps on Vital Strike, and all Standard action attacks, or all monsters with only one attack.
And they are repeatedly ignoring the fact that 'full attack monsters and PC's' are controllable by the party and the player, with good tactics, feats, condition infliction, or spells.
'Ooooo, the Vital Strike guy can just try to get his full attack off, like everyone else who gets shut down.' I was thinking more along the lines of "Crane WIng automatically reduces the damage multiplier for Vital Strike by one step, but does not otherwise deflect the attack."
==Aelryinth
God, I can only imagine what you must think about things like Wind Wall which pretty much invalidates archers...
The investment for snake style may be a bit higher than crane style, but snake is much better in terms of offensive capability.
On the one hand you'll need Sense Motive, and you'll need to max it if you want to use its defensive ability. On the other hand, you don't need to take Dodge and you can skip the middle filler feat with MoMS. You could even qualify for Snake Style with a regular feat at level 3, then take MoMS at that level for Snake Fang and leave it as a one-level dip.
And as everyone keeps saying, don't send single attack melee enemies after the Crane Monk. You wouldn't send a horde of melee-only ground-bound monsters against a party with access to Fly.
If you're in PFS and can't alter encounters, fine, ban it in PFS. You'll notice they simply banned the Synthesist in PFS rather than nerfing it for everyone.
And this whole discussion is about feat parity. Everyone is complaining about the nerfing of Crane Wing, but nobody is complaining about how it utterly stomps on Vital Strike, and all Standard action attacks, or all monsters with only one attack.
Except the Vital Striker can still Feint. Which seemingly goes very well against a Crane Winger.
And this whole discussion is about feat parity. Everyone is complaining about the nerfing of Crane Wing, but nobody is complaining about how it utterly stomps on Vital Strike, and all Standard action attacks, or all monsters with only one attack.Except the Vital Striker can still Feint. Which seemingly goes very well against a Crane Winger.
Feint works well against the new Crane Wing, but not the old Crane Wing.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Oh, no! CW makes characters invincible in a fight against a single enemy with a single melee attack and no ability to adapt! THIS FEAT IS OP IF IT CAN DEFEAT SUCH A TERRIFYING THREAT!!!"
¬¬'
How dare a 4-feats-long feat chain make you good against weak enemies??? Blasphemy!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Feint works well against the new Crane Wing, but not the old Crane Wing.
True, but only because feinting doesn't actually make a foe flatfooted without significant investment. If it did, even against old crane it would have worked(since they couldn't deflect when flatfooted). I know people prefer to nerf rather than buff, but this could have been an attractive balance change for a neglected subsystem.
The investment for snake style may be a bit higher than crane style, but snake is much better in terms of offensive capability.
Crane was attractive as a defensive option and while wing isn't completely useless now, it's switch mostly makes it an AoO trigger for riposte.
Depens om the enemy. For animals and monsters (natural attacks) that's so. For enemies with itterative attcks, not really.
+4 dodge gives you an edge that can easily bump you into "only httable by 20s".I tested this in game for the first time this weekend. We were fighting certain ghoul with class levels in rise of runelord. With the +4 applied to the main attack, I was hit only with 20s in the fight. Without it, it was a 16+ for the main attack. So the feat was useful, indeed.
|
"Oh, no! CW makes characters invincible in a fight against a single enemy with a single melee attack and no ability to adapt! THIS FEAT IS OP IF IT CAN DEFEAT SUCH A TERRIFYING THREAT!!!"
¬¬'
How dare a 4-feats-long feat chain make you good against weak enemies??? Blasphemy!
LOL, this is so true. I am more disappointed at the suggestion of where Paizo's direction is going because of this nerf than anything else atm.
|
"Oh, no! CW makes characters invincible in a fight against a single enemy with a single melee attack and no ability to adapt! THIS FEAT IS OP IF IT CAN DEFEAT SUCH A TERRIFYING THREAT!!!"
¬¬'
How dare a 4-feats-long feat chain make you good against weak enemies??? Blasphemy!
This is a bit of a misrepresentation of the opinions of why Crane Wing is overpowered. The arguments against it tend to be more against its power to utterly mitigate successes. Even against powerful / multiple foes, CW still lets you block a single attack, which will reduce the damage taken in addition to ignoring any possible attack "attachments" such as poison, grab, trip, etc.
I still think it got nerfed too hard, but it could have at least used a few changes to allow 20s, "attachments", and the like to hit. As it was, it was a bit out of line with the general power of feats.
Whether or not feats need to be more powerful to make up for the martial vs. caster disparity at upper levels is up for debate, as I've seen more people argue this point as of late.
Gustavo that's why I said mostly, given high enough AC or an enemy with low enough attack near auto negating an attack is still good. Of course it doesn't change anything for a character with a really high AC or a character with low AC. And it is far less attractive against creatures or NPC's with ways to greatly boost attack bonuses.
Everyone is complaining about the nerfing of Crane Wing, but nobody is complaining about how it utterly stomps on Vital Strike, and all Standard action attacks, or all monsters with only one attack.
Meanwhile the kobold with a javelin snickered quietly to the short bow holding goblin...
"Oh, no! CW makes characters invincible in a fight against a single enemy with a single melee attack and no ability to adapt! THIS FEAT IS OP IF IT CAN DEFEAT SUCH A TERRIFYING THREAT!!!"
¬¬'
How dare a 4-feats-long feat chain make you good against weak enemies??? Blasphemy!
oh no! CW makes characters invincible if they spend a modicum of effort to reduce the enemy to one attack, even if that enemy invests three feats to be at least halfway effective against enemies employing the same methods! CLEARLY THE VITAL STRIKE FEAT LINE IS OP IF IT CAN BE SO THREATENING WITH JUST A SINGLE ATTACK AND NEUTRALIZED SO EASILY!
------------ahem.
As for Wind Wall, that's generally a positioning issue for an archer. Trying to nerf that is like trying to nerf Wind as an environmental effect in general. Invent a feat that lets you shoot an arrow with a standard action through any wind, including a hurricane, and you won't have much problem. People will just sigh and nod and say 'that's pretty cool' and life will go on.
But making VItal Strikes be more powerful then just standard one attack actions, esp against Crane Wing? Sacrilege that such feats might offset one another!
==Aelryinth
And this whole discussion is about feat parity. Everyone is complaining about the nerfing of Crane Wing, but nobody is complaining about how it utterly stomps on Vital Strike, and all Standard action attacks, or all monsters with only one attack.Except the Vital Striker can still Feint. Which seemingly goes very well against a Crane Winger.
And sure, how many players are going to be successful at Feinting, effectively losing 1/2 their attacks ANWAYS, which is the same as being forced to full attack and getting an attack lost every round?
Oh, and, of course, the Crane Winger wouldn't invest in Sense Motive or anything to dispute this. We'll just force the Vital Striker to invest in ANOTHER 3 feat chain so he's actually effective when forced to use Standard Actions instead of full attacks because his enemy isn't dumb. After all, it isn't that he WANTS to use Standard Actions on enemies...he wants to do full attacks. Unfortunately, melee is not archery, and being forced, round after round, to move and strike can get even a recalcitrant fighter to invest in Vital Strikes just so they do some additional damage.
==Aelryinth
As for Wind Wall, that's generally a positioning issue for an archer.
Not always
So hey, what about that whole "prepare an action to attack before the crane winger strikes, which he can't deflect because he is not in defensive fighting because he haven't attacked yet".
Which works with Vital Strike, by the way
So hey, what about that whole "prepare an action to attack before the crane winger strikes, which he can't deflect because he is not in defensive fighting because he haven't attacked yet".
Because that is not a universal interpretation of defensive fighting, and among the kookier ones I've personally seen grabbing at the air for an argument point, for a number of reasons which were pointed out earlier in the thread.
Defensive fighting is not the Defender enhancement.==Aelryinth
What can a character with CW do to avoid multiple attacks? Move? Because if that's the case, then the character is limiting himself to a single attack too... and most likely not being very useful to his party.
Vital Strike is an awful feat, CW or not. It's not a good measure for balance. Saying CW is OP because it neutralizes VS is like saying WF is OP because it neutralizes Dodge.
CW requires lots of investment to be able to deflect a single melee attack per round. It's easily bypassed by ranged attacks, spells, multiple opponents and/or opponents with multiple attacks.
If deflecting one melee attack per turn is enough to make the character invulnerable, then there is something really wrong with the GM's encounter design.
But why should GMs learn to use simple tactics when they can ask Paizo to nerf CW in uselessness. It's just adding yet another feat to the huge pile of underwhelming trap options already present in the game.
As for Wind Wall, that's generally a positioning issue for an archer.Not always
Erm, you cite Wind Wall, and counter-example with a different spell?
And note, I said 'Generally', meaning there are exceptions.
I also noted that 'wind in general' is a problem for archers. Control Winds will do the same thing. SO will trying to fight in a thunderstorm.
Fickle Winds is cool because it nerfs the enemy's archers and does nothing to yours. From that standpoint, it's like mass Fire Resistance vs a bunch of brimoraks.
==Aelryinth
What can a character with CW do to avoid multiple attacks? Move? Because if that's the case, then the character is limiting himself to a single attack too... and most likely not being very useful to his party.
Vital Strike is an awful feat, CW or not. It's not a good measure for balance. Saying CW is OP because it neutralizes VS is like saying WF is OP because it neutralizes Dodge.
CW requires lots of investment to be able to deflect a single melee attack per round. It's easily bypassed by ranged attacks, spells, multiple opponents and/or opponents with multiple attacks.
If deflecting one melee attack per turn is enough to make the character invulnerable, then there is something really wrong with the GM's encounter design.
But why should GMs learn to use simple tactics when they can ask Paizo to nerf CW in uselessness. It's just adding yet another feat to the huge pile of underwhelming trap options already present in the game.
He can force the enemy into standard actions or less. COndition infliction...dazing assault, staggering criticals, etc. Slow spells, they get cursed. Various spells and effects to reduce TH rolls and make for a flurry of misses, raging from intimidate checks to being dazzled.
Getting removed to one attack is NOT true, because of Riposte. He gets two attacks at full BAB because of the free AoO he was basically generating every round or two. So his base damage is going to be twice that of his opponent...or he gets a full attack, and his opponent gets less effective ones with bad chances to hit, and the rare one to get through is neutralized.
--------------
Vital Strike is a feat designed to make you more effective with a single action. CW is a feat that neutralizes and punishes single actions. The two should off set, they don't...the one feat neutralizes the whole chain without penalty. That's feat disparity, and massively unequal, yet they cost the same, and CW can actually be acquired earlier.
It's unequal, and unfair. (shrugs)
==Aelryinth
Vital strike is a single feat, crane wing/riposte is 3-4-5. If you want spring attack and all the other stuff you mention that the crane winger needs to "shut down an encounter" you are looking at about a 6 feat investment.
Even if you take the whole vital strike chain, it's only 3 feats.
If you want to make the argument MoMS dip is the problem, that's fine.
With preregs Bab +6, 11 and 16, vs whatever Crane is supposed to have, and with IUS being basically free by ANY monk or UA fighter dip. So you're having a feat that's available at level 6 at worst nerfing a feat chain that ends at +16. Totally and completely. A feat chain whose only purpose is to make the huge annoyance of being continually forced into single attacks more effective.
Absolutely neutralizes it.Nah, not seeing the fairness of it at all. The early entry didn't faze me...you still get more tools to use in harmony with the chain as you level. It doesn't lose its effectiveness, and still absolutely shuts down all single attacks, at the PC's will.
==Aelryinth
All those status effects can also be used against the character of CW. So both sides of the conflict can swing inaccurately and not make a single hit. CW is not overpowered because it can make you survive the attacks of a severely nerfed opponent.
The guy with CW also either invested 4 feats, delayed his BAB, class features and CL by 2 levels and/or is a Monk with no FoB. All of which are a considerable cost to his offensive abilities. And let's not forget the fact that the guy with CW can't use a shield. Or TWF. Or a 2-handed weapon.
Getting an extra one-handed attack "every round or two" is far from being impressive... Especially considering the investment necessary for getting that extra attack.
Vital Strike sucks. No feat should be on par with it because of how limited it is. The only thing unfair is how weak VS is.