So, I'm really liking the feel of the brawler class. One of the better feats for the class that also came with the ACG is the Pummeling Style chain, especially with the pseudo-pounce of Pummeling Charge.
Now, from as far as I can tell, Pummeling Style doesn't actually require you to use unarmed attacks, meaning it could potentially open up some other weapon options. The focus on charging attacks brings to mind the feat Horn of the Criosphinx, which lets you add 2x your Strength bonus to damage at the end of a charge as long as you're two-handing a two-handed weapon.
I would really like to figure out the best way to combine these. Brawler's Flurry necessitates the use of unarmed strikes, close weapons, or monk weapons. Of those, the only ones I can think of that are specifically two-handed are the quarterstaff, bayonet, seven-branched sword, monk's spade, kusarigama, kyoketsu shoge, double-chained kama, and bo staff. Most of these the brawler doesn't get proficiency with, and I'd say the seven-branched sword is the only one that might be worth spending a feat on.
The quarterstaff is a sort of iconic monk weapon. While the damage is unimpressive, it does bring the advantages/disadvantages of a double weapon, and some of the fun flavor feats, like Quarterstaff Master and Tripping Twirl.
The bayonet is sort of an awkward one, but it's the only two-handed weapon in the close group, which means it eventually becomes a candidate for Close Weapon Mastery, allowing it to gain a higher weapon dice than the quarterstaff, since it can do unarmed damage at level-4.
The seven-branched sword deals a pretty decent 1d10, and with the number of attacks that go with a full flurry, the x3 crit could potentially be pretty juicy, since you only need one confirmed crit with Pummeling Style to make the whole attack crit. It does require a feat to gain proficiency, but it's overall a solid option.
I want to build a character around one of these weapons and these feats, but I'm not sure which is best, or if I've missed something. Any thoughts?
The best counter response I can find to this is that, by RAW, you have to deliver the attack from pummeling style via a punch (which is defined as a type of unarmed strike). This part is inarguable, as it is written in the very first sentence in the description.
Now, while most people would accept that means this style is for unarmed strikes, I see this logic might not work with you.
Instead, I will argue this-because the attack must be delivered via a punch, you need one free hand in order to use it. Thus, you cannot use a 2 handed weapon, a 1 handed weapon in two hands, or use TWF (unless at least one of your weapons is an unarmed strike).
If I cannot stop madness, I will at least give my all to hamper its spread.
I will also say- I've done the math. A fighter with 2 TWF kukris at level 6 can crit with his ENTIRE FULL ATTACK ~48% of the time. This feat was not meant for anything other than unarmed strikes (which only gets 18% under similar circumstances). That is going to be my moral justifications in all this, and how I try to get everyone to understand why I take a hard stand. I love pummeling style and charge- they solve the problems of unarmed strikes (DR and need for TWF, which means only shines in full attacks). It can put the monk as a serious choice next to barbarians as DPR tanks. I do not want this to buried next to the synthesists and the leadership feat.
i for one welcome anything that allows the classes not named barbarian to pounce.
this is basically pounce+ultra vital strike.
also, what of the cestus? brass knuckles? gauntlets? punching daggers? the klar or neko-whatevertheheck claw hand things? those re all weapons one could feasibly punch with.
Well this thread exploded over night.
As far as I can read it, the feat is pretty ambiguous, because it doesn't specifically call out unarmed strikes. Regardless of what the language or common sense might suggest, the rules text is unclear, putting it in the realm of GM interpretation.
For the purposes of this thread, I was trying to figure out the best way to optimize the build assuming 2-handed weapons were viable options. Whether or not you agree with my interpretation of the feat is pretty much irrelevant for this purpose. Barring an FAQ rules clarification, I'm operating under this interpretation, and am trying to build accordingly.
Is this usable in PFS? If so I'd be interested how it's handled. If not, we're talking home games only at which point it's a moot argument really. Rule however you want at your table because as it's worded today there is no right or wrong answer.
This is for a home game with a lenient GM who likes the "rule of cool" more than hard mechanical balance, so I've got some wiggle room. That said, I'd like to stay within the mechanics as much as possible, based on my assumption of 2-handed weapon viability.
Pummeling Charge requires a flurry attack, which has a limited pool of available weapons, especially two-handed ones. I broke down the three that I thought were best in my initial post, none of which have that high crit range. The options would open up a lot more if one handed weapons wielded in two hands counted, but Horn of the Criosphinx seems pretty clear on that one.
It really doesn't strike me as much different than a standard full attack (since you hit the same number of times, with each hit dealing the same amount of damage), except for the nice shiny "one crit means it all crits" thing and the fact it's all piled into one attack, which is nice for getting past DR.
The perk is the using it on a charge, since that used to be just a barbarian/druid thing for the most part, and a flurrying brawler gets a lot of attacks to pile onto that charge.
You make the same number of attack rolls, and the same number of damage rolls, with the same modifiers to each, as a standard full attack. If you roll a 1, that's one attack that you missed and thus one damage roll you don't make, just the same as if you were full-attacking normally. Why would continuing to attack after a roll of a 1 be broken? The fighter can miss a hit on his full attack and still keep swinging, that's just one hits worth of damage he doesn't get to add. Like, it's no different than a regular full attack action, save the damage being pooled, just like Clustered Shots.
The crit thing is pretty strong, but there aren't many weapons on the list that really get to abuse it. I just like the "flurry on a charge" component of the whole thing, though it's just piled into a super hit. Doesn't seem any more OP than, say, the flurry of spirited charge RAGELANCEPOUNCE barbarian.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then that means you've played a lot of games with an optional rules interpretation that I suspect isn't part of the majority of games, and are passing balance judgments based on such. While it's a total valid observation for the games you play, it doesn't really mean much for anyone else who isn't in those games.
Fumbles are stupid. You drop your weapon once every twenty attacks? Gimme a f@$~in break. Relic of the past. Time to move forward and leave the ridiculous slap stick crit fumble behind. Imo.
Yeah, I'm not over-fond of crit fumble rules myself. More to the point, the official rules are not obligated to comply with people's house-rules.
The game doesn't define every single word used in every single published book. The argument that "punch" means anything other than its plain meaning given it's context is nothing more than an attempt to ultra-munchkin the rules to your own benefit. No GM worth his or her salt would ever allow such a ridiculous interpretation.
Again, whether or not you agree with my interpretation of the rule is completely irrelevant to the point of the thread. If you don't think that's how the feat was intended, then by all means ignore this thread or and rule it differently in your own games.