Alright folks, got a new Prestige Class for you fans of einhanders, scarlet throne, mithral current, and being a badass:
Let me know what you think!
I definitely appreciate this einhander support! This prestige class is quite interesting.
Feedback:
With the extra reach, uncanny dodge, Mobile Attacker, Bait of the Dragon, this archetype successfully grants mechanics that make it feel like a mobile combat specialist. I love this!
Mobile attacker needs to be toned down though. Be very careful with granting additional attacks, especially when this prestige class already hits like a 2H weapon fighter.
What does Threatening Demeanor do? Do this mean that if a wizard is 40 feat away from an unarmed Landsknecht, they must make a concentration check? If someone is 15 feat away from the Landskencht as does something to provoke an attack of opportunity, does the Landskencht get to throw something at them?
Silver Crown Strike appears to be a weaker full-attack to me? Does it do something I am not seeing?
Stance of Assured Victory seems very strong for a stance. It grants what will probably be a +5 or 6 hit bonus to your allies, and lets everyone AOO all the time.
What does Threatening Demeanor do? Do this mean that if a wizard is 40 feat away from an unarmed Landsknecht, they must make a concentration check? If someone is 15 feat away from the Landskencht as does something to provoke an attack of opportunity, does the Landskencht get to throw something at them?
I don't know where you're getting 40 ft. from. It lets you threaten out to your weapon's normal reach if it's sheathed. Just like Mithral Current Style. I think I even used the same wording.
Silver Crown Strike appears to be a weaker full-attack to me? Does it do something I am not seeing?
Remember the old Mithral Current 9th? The full attack as a standard action plus extra damage plus no miss chance plus all the other crap? It's like that but scaled back because it's now a 7th level strike and I'm trying to keep it in check for the upcoming errata to Broken Blade and Primal Fury.
Stance of Assured Victory seems very strong for a stance. It grants what will probably be a +5 or 6 hit bonus to your allies, and lets everyone AOO all the time.
It's another zone of nope. I'll keep an eye on it but I don't think it's too worrisome.
I don't know where you're getting 40 ft. from. It lets you threaten out to your weapon's normal reach if it's sheathed. Just like Mithral Current Style. I think I even used the same wording.
That would be my eyes acting up. I saw a "of" instead of a "to."
Remember the old Mithral Current 9th? The full attack as a standard action plus extra damage plus no miss chance plus all the other crap? It's like that but scaled back because it's now a 7th level strike and I'm trying to keep it in check for the upcoming errata to Broken Blade and Primal Fury.
Earlier it said Full-round action, but now its a standard action. As a standard, this is definitely a lot more fair.
I don't know where you're getting 40 ft. from. It lets you threaten out to your weapon's normal reach if it's sheathed. Just like Mithral Current Style. I think I even used the same wording.That would be my eyes acting up. I saw a "of" instead of a "to."
Remember the old Mithral Current 9th? The full attack as a standard action plus extra damage plus no miss chance plus all the other crap? It's like that but scaled back because it's now a 7th level strike and I'm trying to keep it in check for the upcoming errata to Broken Blade and Primal Fury.Earlier it said Full-round action, but now its a standard action. As a standard, this is definitely a lot more fair.
Ah. Yeah, that was my eyes acting up. Should have been a standard from the get go.
Okay! So, The Landsknecht. I.... have mixed feelings about this one in all honestly. It encourages you to use strength and it great einhander support because of it... buuut, at the same time, it directs you towards dexterity, because of its Attack of Opportunity focused... I guess it is possible to use both, but it does seem to have a struggle for identity... and honestly, talking about identity... it feels lackluster.
Surprising Strike is basically Voices in the Dark from the Harbinger class, but limited to /day, which makes it significantly weaker. Mobile Attacker reminds me off Eulogy from the Bleak Emmerisary class, only at level 20, you get to move an attack as a free action, any amount of times per round. Then Bait the Dragon is basically Robilar's Gambit, only it costs a swift action per round, meaning its impossible to use with boosts or counters.
Honestly... Superior Reach, Silver Crown Strike and Stance of Assured Victory are great. Completely and utterly great. But, they aren’t enough to salvage the class. I feel like the LAndsknecht doesn’t have its identity down completely... is it meant to be a strong, well-armoured fighter that creates a zone of control? Or is it a mobile, lightly armoured fighter, dashing across the battlefield, hitting enemies left and right? It seems to be attempting to be both... and its not working.
I would rather just play the Bleak Emissary than this, as the Bleak Emissary would give me all the agility and mobility I want. On top of actual mobility options like flight and teleportation. So... I think the class needs some work, so that the Landsknecht has some real advantages over the Bleak Emissary/Harbinger... and get its class identity down straight.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see mobility and zone control as mutually exclusive abilities. I've found in my playtests and games that the two complement each other really well. Zones need to cover a large area to be effective, but within that zone you still need the ability to move around rapidly enough that you can capitalize on your zone's effect. This still holds true when your zone moves with you, as suddenly, your positioning becomes double important because it establishes the position of your zone.
The Landsknecht has several different entries, which each can emphasize different strengths the class brings to the table. A Warder entry allows you to safely pump strength, since you'll have the AoOs from defensive focus and multiple zones you can set up to punish would be enemies. Warder Landsknechts create amazing counter-fighters, their one handed attacks hit as hard as two handed attacks, they can set up situations where they can hit an enemy with three or four AoOs for a single attack and the mobility buffs of the landsknecht help them get where they need to be. A Warlord entry is more offensively oriented, with multiple sources of scaling damage bonus, they can really take advantage of surprising strike, mobile attacker and never outnumbered to put the hurt on groups of enemies and still have options to protect their allies through Stance of Assured Victory. Stalkers offer an interesting mix of the two, especially Brutal Slayers, who would love to get their hands on Silver Crown Strike to toss into a dual strike boss killer. For them, Landsknecht lets them dip their toe into the tanking pool by giving them a zone to control and more mobility options to lay the hurt on enemies.
Bait the Dragon still works fine with counters, as immediate actions eat your next swift action, not your current one. This means that you can activate Bait the Dragon and Dance of the Silver Hurricane to proc two attacks for every time you're attacked, add in Scarlet Throne Riposte and you're dropping two AoOs and a counterattack on anyone dumb enough to try and hit you. For even more fun, your enemies could be triggering AoOs from your allies if you're in Stance of Assured Victory. A four to one ratio of counterattacks to attacks is going to put the hurt on any enemy.
immediate actions eat your next swift action, not your current one
Really? That wasn't my understanding.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's kind of confusingly worded:
Source: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Immediate-Actions
Immediate Actions
Much like a swift action, an immediate action consumes a very small amount of time but represents a larger expenditure of effort and energy than a free action. However, unlike a swift action, an immediate action can be performed at any time—even if it's not your turn. Casting feather fall is an immediate action, since the spell can be cast at any time.
Using an immediate action on your turn is the same as using a swift action and counts as your swift action for that turn. You cannot use another immediate action or a swift action until after your next turn if you have used an immediate action when it is not currently your turn (effectively, using an immediate action before your turn is equivalent to using your swift action for the coming turn). You also cannot use an immediate action if you are flat-footed.
-X
Anyway, time to actually talk about Path of War... does Seize the Opportunity allow you to use Vital Strike with AoO’s?
Because of Threatening Demeanor, Superior Reach, Bait the Dragon and even Stance of Assured Victory, Landsknecht has a heavy focus on Attack of Opportunities. Meaning that the Landsknecht is encouraging you to have high dexterity in order to be able to take advantage of all these abilities, and make multiple attack of opportunity in a round. However, the strongest initial draw to this class, is going to be Strength of Arms, which gives you a significant bonus to having high strength. Not to mention the Silver Crown Strike also encourages you to use strength, due to its weapon draw bonus.
Now, if it was just strength and dexterity that you had to focus on in order to fully use the Landsknecht, then it wouldn’t be a problem. As focusing on two different ability scores is possible. The problem, is that this is a PrC for Path of War martial adept classes... and they all have strong focus on your initiation modifier. Even the Landsknecht itself has some encouragement for you to use this third modifier, with Mobile Attacker and Stance of Assured Victory deriving from it. And three ability scores is getting rather MAD.
Looking over the base classes... I would only ever use the Warder for the full 10 levels with this class. Because they allow you to use your initiation modifier for Combat Reflexes, completely eliminating the 3-ability score focus of the PrC. If I was playing a Stalker, I would only pick this up if I chose the Brutal Slayer, and I would only go 5 levels to get Mobile Attacker. For any other class? I only see myself picking up the first level for Strength of Arms, then going no further than that.
All you need to do in order to fix this problem, is to allow you to use strength to bump up the amount of attack of opportunities you can make per round. Say, something like this.
Counterattack Focus (Ex): At level 4, the Landsknecht learns the importance of being always able to take advantage of openings that the enemy makes to strike. When using Combat Reflexes to gain extra Attack of Opportunity equal to your dexterity modifier, you gain an extra amount of Attack of Opportunity’s a round equal to 1/2 your strength modifier.
Fluff is probably horrible, but hopefully it gets my point across. This brings together the class firmly, allowing you to skimp somewhat on Dexterity, and focus on Strength and get full use out of all the class features. Yet at the same time, you still get a reduced effectiveness if you only focus strength, and have abysmal dexterity. Not only that, but as a level 4 ability, pushing up Reach and Mobile Attacker would make it hard to simply dip into the class for a few levels, as well as eliminating the honest ‘dead level’ of level 6. Finally, as its only active when using your dexterity for Combat Reflexes, Warder’s don’t get infinite attack of opportunities in a round.
Also, whilst I love the fact Message of Ruin gives you even more options for mobility, especially the ability to actually fly from planet to planet, which would be an fluff for a character... its just a straight upgrade to Grim News, which is a big no no. You don’t just need to hit Withered Bonds with a level restrictment as others have been saying, but you need Message of Ruin to trade something in return... and in all honestly? You need to give up more in general.
A lot of people are afraid that the Bleak Emissary is a straight up upgrade to the Harbinger, instead of a change in style... and honestly? There completely and utterly right. You give up, what? The end-game ability to ready all the maneuvers of 2 disciplines? Giving enemies a measly -2 to saves and skill checks when your flanking them? And in return, you get a stronger maneuverer recovery, and much, MUCH stronger mobility and damage potential.
Bleak Emissary needs to lose several harbinger abilities in order to match the power that you gain from taking this class... but in all honestly, whilst abilities like Tenebrous Reach and Bleak Prophecy are nice abilities... I don’t see losing them would be enough. I suggest those two abilities, along with potentially Elusive Shadow being lost (you're focusing on attack, not defence) could be a place to start and test. But, I honestly think the Bleak Emissary might need to lose Accursed Will in order to balance with the Harbinger... which saddens me, as I do love the Bleak Emissary
And... that’s enough said. The Zealot Archetypes doesn’t really interest me in all honestly...
I don't think Accursed Will should ever be modified by any Harbinger archetype. Though the scaling bonus to attack rolls and save DCs when moving should be the first thing to go.
Why is it that everyone always focus on the Scaling Bonus to attack and saves? Dark Focus gives you the exact same bonuses, and Unstoppable Utterance is a replacement for that. Your not losing or gaining anything by change it from two focused disciplines, to when you move.
I don't think Accursed Will should ever be modified by any Harbinger archetype. Though the scaling bonus to attack rolls and save DCs when moving should be the first thing to go.
If what you're saying is that Omen Rider should keep accursed will then I can only disagree. Mounted combat+maneuvers is already busted enough, no need to throw on accursed will.
Anyway, time to actually talk about Path of War... does Seize the Opportunity allow you to use Vital Strike with AoO’s?
Yes, Seize the Opportunity allows you to vital strike with AoOs.
Now. About the Landsknecht. Let's actually break this down:
STR Abilities: Strength of Arms
DEX Abilities: Bait the Dragon, Stance of Assured Victory
Initiation Modifier Abilities: Mobile Attacker
Stat Neutral Abilities: Threatening Demeanor, Never Outnumbered, Uncanny Dodge/Improved, Superior Reach, Silver Crown Strike.
If you choose to forgo Strength you lose out on one ability. If you choose to forgo your Initiation Modifier you lose out on one ability, if that. If you forgo Dexterity, you lose out on two abilities, sort of (Stance of Assured Victory relies on your allies even more than it relies on you).
If you're a STR based Warder, you're DAD anyway and can take full advantage of everything. Not every class can use every ability to it's full extent. Warlords going into Battle Templar gain nothing from Ordained Champion. PsyWars going into Awakened Blade can't get 9th level powers, but a Warder/Psion can. Both Warders and Warlords going into Dragon Fury gain nothing from Dragon Fury Training.
These things are an opportunity cost. Opportunity cost is not a bad thing. You make choices in your build, and by making those choices you lose out on some options, but others are opened up to you.
If you can afford all three stats, good for you. If you can't, your character can still be very effective, just less than it would be if you could afford to maximize three stats. But that would be true regardless of your character's class choices. A character with more high stats will always perform better than a character with fewer high stats. That's part of the core mechanics of the game.
Hmmm... so what's the full list of stuff that Seize the Opportunity does allow you to do, instead of just an attack?
Let me break this down correctly
STR Abilities: Strength of Arms, Silver Crown Strike (you do most damage when you draw with the strike, which lets you add your strength per successful 'hit')
Dex Abilities: Bait the Dragon. Stance of Assured Victory. Threatening Demeanor, Superior Reach (the later two encourage AoO's, which are Dex based)
Initiation Modifier Abilities: Mobile Attacker, Stance of Assured Victory. (Did you forget that you give your allies an attack bonus equal to your e initiation modifier in this stance?)
Neutral Abilities: Never Outnumbered, Uncanny Dodge/Improved
Look, its not that every class will be able to use every ability to its full extent that I mind. I know that not every class will be able to use the PrC's to 100% power. That's part of the reason why PrC's are no longer so popular or used in Pathfinder as they were in 3.5. I don't mind that at all. My problem is, the Landsnecht is an MAD class that is a multitude of different strong abilities, that don't come together to form a strong whole.
The Landsnecht is mainly about Attack of Opportunities, yet the fluff favours eihanders, which favours strength... yet there is a clear divide between strength and zone control. All you need is one ability to tie it all together, one ability to help reduce the MAD factor, and let the Landsnecht become a mobile einhander zone controller, that any class would want to take... instead of only a class a Warder would ever want to take.
Opportunity cost is fine. After all, even with an ability like that as I suggest, A Warder would suit this build more often that not... but they'll be losing their defenive power of shield and iron tortiose. A Warlord will gain mobility and the ability to create small zones, whilst losing ability to empower and aid their allies. A Stalker will lose some of their raw damage in exchange for similar. But if its MAD like this, and split parts instead of a full packet... I wouldn't want to go into this in anything but Warder.
How does Scarlet Throne Dignity interact with critical hits?
My eighth-level Scarlet Throne/Golden Lion Warlord with Scarlet Throne Style and Scarlet Throne Dignity is currently fighting centaurs in a PBP. I state my intention to use Scarlet Throne Dignity (yeah, not abbreviating that) pre-rolling for a result of 29 and expending a prepared maneuver. A centaur attacks her, and rolls a natural 20 on his attack roll; his final result isn't enough to beat my 29. His critical confirmation roll is even less.
What happens? Does Scarlet Throne Dignity negate the critical hit, reducing it to a normal hit, as a natural 20 on an attack roll is an automatic success? Or does the wording of the feat prevent the hit from landing altogether?
For the sake of keeping the game moving, the GM ruled that it reduced the critical to a normal hit, but I'd like to know your intentions.
How does Scarlet Throne Dignity interact with critical hits?
My eighth-level Scarlet Throne/Golden Lion Warlord with Scarlet Throne Style and Scarlet Throne Dignity is currently fighting centaurs in a PBP. I state my intention to use Scarlet Throne Dignity (yeah, not abbreviating that) pre-rolling for a result of 29 and expending a prepared maneuver. A centaur attacks her, and rolls a natural 20 on his attack roll; his final result isn't enough to beat my 29. His critical confirmation roll is even less.
What happens? Does Scarlet Throne Dignity negate the critical hit, reducing it to a normal hit, as a natural 20 on an attack roll is an automatic success? Or does the wording of the feat prevent the hit from landing altogether?
For the sake of keeping the game moving, the GM ruled that it reduced the critical to a normal hit, but I'd like to know your intentions.
A natural 20 is always a hit, even against counters or other opposed rolls. It follows the same rule as this one:
Critical Hit vs. Counter
As this is bound to come up at the gaming table at least once in a while, a player or the GM will roll a natural 20 against a creature or player and the decision to use a counter will arise. Relax, here's the answer. Counters may be used against a critical hit except if the threatening attack roll was a natural 20. Critical hits from weapons with increased threat ranges (such as rapiers) can be countered if the threatening attack roll was not a 20.
Hmmm... so what's the full list of stuff that Seize the Opportunity does allow you to do, instead of just an attack?
Let me break this down correctly
Cool. Let me correct you on some errors.
STR Abilities: Strength of Arms, Silver Crown Strike (you do most damage when you draw with the strike, which lets you add your strength per successful 'hit')
Deadly Agility applies to Silver Crown Strike's bonus damage just like it does with all strength to damage. So Silver Crown Strike is STR/DEX Neutral.
Dex Abilities: Bait the Dragon. Stance of Assured Victory. Threatening Demeanor, Superior Reach (the later two encourage AoO's, which are Dex based)
Threatening Demeanor allows you to threaten, which you need to do regardless if you want to attack. It's support for Mithral Current, and benefits you just fine regardless of whether you're making an AoO or not.
Superior Reach is useful for everyone. It doesn't work only on AoOs, it applies to every Einhander Attack you make. So you can use it to hit someone who's normally too far away, or to hit someone without having to provoke an AoO because of their reach. It is not in any way Dexterity based, nor does it only provide benefit to someone making an Attack of Opportunity.
Initiation Modifier Abilities: Mobile Attacker, Stance of Assured Victory. (Did you forget that you give your allies an attack bonus equal to your e initiation modifier in this stance?)
Stance of Assured Victory's meat is that it allows your allies to make AoOs they couldn't normally make. That it provides an attack bonus is secondary. If I removed the attack bonus, the stance would still be very strong.
Okay fine, Deadly Agility applying to Silver Crown Strike I will grant you that. Through it does make me question whenever or not Strength of arm applies as well, and if so I say that Silver Crown Strike will be Str focused due to that synergy.
Apart from that however, you have not corrected me on any errors. Threatening Demanor is AoO focused only. It allows you to threaten, and thus provoke an attack of opportunity against people, it has no other uses. Superior Reach, whilst it is useful in general, has its main use come in with AoO's as it makes it significantly easier to land AoO's. Its why the AoO focused Warder gains such an extended Reach after all. Reach helps for every attack you make, but benefits AoO's more than anything else. That's why I say it is Dexterity Ability.
And yes, Stance of Assured Victory is mostly focused on the AoO's network you create. However, it still gives your allies a substantial buff to their attack. Even more so than a bard. Hence why it is a Initation Modifier Ability, its not based on that ability, but it still uses the ability strongly.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Threatening Demanor is AoO focused only. It allows you to threaten, and thus provoke an attack of opportunity against people, it has no other uses.
To me, it felt like it was there to make Mithral Current function better, not to help you get AOOs. Yes, it allows AOOs, but its main point is that when you use the free sheathe from Mithril Current stances you don't suddenly stop casters from having to make concentration checks. Also, without this ability, people could walk away from your because you have stopped threatening because your weapon is sheathed. It is not an ability to generate AOOs, but an ability to allow you to still threaten, so that when you free-action sheathe your sword, you aren't completely hosed.
Superior Reach, whilst it is useful in general, has its main use come in with AoO's as it makes it significantly easier to land AoO's. Its why the AoO focused Warder gains such an extended Reach after all. Reach helps for every attack you make, but benefits AoO's more than anything else. That's why I say it is Dexterity Ability.
Yes, it helps with getting AOOs, but I want this feature for its other uses. I want to flank easier, have easier access to full attacks, and avoid enemy AOOs. The fact that I get to make AOOs more often is a bonus, but not the reason I want this ability, and not the reason I want this prestige class.
Though I do admit I would take combat reflexes anyway if using a Warlord. I see no reason not to have a 14 dexterity on the Warlord due to their medium armor proficiency, so the combat reflexes will do just fine. There is also a great 1st level Mithril Current stance for this, called Ready the Draw.
If you are taking this prestige class on a stalker, chances are you already have become Dex reliant.
I don't mind that this prestige class benefits some classes more than others in the slightest. I would still take it on a Warlord because I feel that it would benefit a Warlord enough to become worth it. I would not take it on a Mystic or Harbinger because I feel these classes are more reliant on their class abilities scaling upwards than the Warlord.
Like I said, I don't mind the PrC benefiting some class more than others either. I just want to see the class actually work instead of being this jumbled together pile of parts that it currently is.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And what about it does not work? I see a working prestige class. I see a prestige class with beneficial class features for anyone with a balanced ability score array (except warder. They can ignore dex)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Like I said, I don't mind the PrC benefiting some class more than others either. I just want to see the class actually work the way I think it should instead of being this jumbled together pile of parts that it currently is because they don't work together the way I think they should .
Given your posts and the responses you've gotten to them, this is really what I believe you to be saying.
In other news, not sure if it's really a big deal but, we've decided that the two traits Unorthodox Method and Practiced Initiator will remain untyped traits so that they can be freely taken with any other traits you might want to squeeze onto your build, including each other.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I cannot seem to find the links to the documents containing Mithral Current and Elemental Flux. Would anyone care to poit me in the right direction?
In other news, not sure if it's really a big deal but, we've decided that the two traits Unorthodox Method and Practiced Initiator will remain untyped traits so that they can be freely taken with any other traits you might want to squeeze onto your build, including each other.
You probably know this, but there is no such thing as an "untyped" trait. They are always part of a category. Creating a new category for your books doesn't give me a "warm and fuzzy" feeling however. Neither is particularly so important that it warrants such treatment honestly. Make the first a social, and the other a combat trait and be done with it.
Creating a new category is bad form if not done for some worthwhile reason, and "just because we can" doesn't really seem... well, right?
In other news, not sure if it's really a big deal but, we've decided that the two traits Unorthodox Method and Practiced Initiator will remain untyped traits so that they can be freely taken with any other traits you might want to squeeze onto your build, including each other.You probably know this, but there is no such thing as an "untyped" trait. They are always part of a category. Creating a new category for your books doesn't give me a "warm and fuzzy" feeling however. Neither is particularly so important that it warrants such treatment honestly. Make the first a social, and the other a combat trait and be done with it.
Creating a new category is bad form if not done for some worthwhile reason, and "just because we can" doesn't really seem... well, right?
Hence the announcement about them remaining uncategorized. The worthwhile reason is to make sure that people taking those traits have the freedom to choose other traits they want to compliment their build without being limited by unnecessary restrictions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would bet 80-90% of the people who will actually use your book, house rule the limitations of trait choice away, if not all.
Your book will never be used in PFS or in any super strict game, where the rules are that closely followed, let us be realistic. It is pushing past boundaries that those games don't want challenged.
That being said, again what worthwhile reason is there to not follow the guidelines for the game you are producing a book to be compatible with? It doesn't "hurt" the game play of those using the book to publish it following the established rules in such a case.
Why make it an "oddity" for no good reason? It makes no sense whatsoever as what you are intentioning is already being done in the vast majority of games you book will see use in.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally prefer that the two traits are untyped specifically because my GM runs the trait rules the normal way. Having Unorthodox Method lock away all other Combat traits (for example) would be rather frustrating.
I would bet 80-90% of the people who will actually use your book, house rule the limitations of trait choice away, if not all.
Your book will never be used in PFS or in any super strict game, where the rules are that closely followed, let us be realistic. It is pushing past boundaries that those games don't want challenged.
That being said, again what worthwhile reason is there to not follow the guidelines for the game you are producing a book to be compatible with? It doesn't "hurt" the game play of those using the book to publish it following the established rules in such a case.
Why make it an "oddity" for no good reason? It makes no sense whatsoever as what you are intentioning is already being done in the vast majority of games you book will see use in.
So your argument for why we should categorize our traits is that (you think) most of the people who will use our content are going to ignore that rule about trait categories anyway?
If that's the case, then all the more reason to leave them uncategorized so that 100% of our fanbase know the traits are supposed to be selectable with any other traits, instead of only 80-90%.
Okay, I guess "a few days" was exceedingly generous.
Seems like a solid build. I hadn't really thought much about zealots going into Landsknecht, I was more concerned with the less supernatural guys. Where are you getting your 5 AoOs from?
1 as normal, Dex gives 1, and Impulsive Reactions gives another 3.
-e-
General point is that Landsknecht can totally take advantage of all of its class features even if it's not a Warder.
I can see that! Haha, very nicely done. I'll have to thank Luke for impulsive reactions, I must have missed that conviction somewhere.
I would bet 80-90% of the people who will actually use your book, house rule the limitations of trait choice away, if not all.
Your book will never be used in PFS or in any super strict game, where the rules are that closely followed, let us be realistic. It is pushing past boundaries that those games don't want challenged.
That being said, again what worthwhile reason is there to not follow the guidelines for the game you are producing a book to be compatible with? It doesn't "hurt" the game play of those using the book to publish it following the established rules in such a case.
Why make it an "oddity" for no good reason? It makes no sense whatsoever as what you are intentioning is already being done in the vast majority of games you book will see use in.
So your argument for why we should categorize our traits is that (you think) most of the people who will use our content are going to ignore that rule about trait categories anyway?
If that's the case, then all the more reason to leave them uncategorized so that 100% of our fanbase know the traits are supposed to be selectable with any other traits, instead of only 80-90%.
Actually what I guess I'm saying, is that I'm not really interested in whatever "stealth fixes" you think you need to implement to fix core rules you don't like. If you want to implement house rules that alter basic premises of the game you are supposedly making this book to work with, save them for PoW Unchained or something. The more little changes you implement that stray from the basic rules, the more things people will have to change back so the book works the way the core rules intended. Publish it the way the game expects, categorized and put a side bar saying you think it is dumb that they are separated and traits should be available to all no matter the combination.
I'm not really interested in your "fixes" for the game that my group and I enjoy. I'm interested in plug and play mechanics that are well thought out and well balanced. The more alterations you make, the more work I need to do, and the less attractive your product becomes as a consumer. Personally half the fluff you put into the book is going to be gutted/changed in our group, not because it is bad, but because we will have to fit it into our homebrew world. I'm fairly certain I'm not the only one in that situation as well.
To be honest, I absolutely do no care whatsoever if the traits are untyped or typed. We ignore those rules anyway and find them to be pretty stupid.
It's not like they rewrote the godawful underwater rules, or illusion mechanics. They didn't perform a "stealth fix." All they did was put in 2 traits that allow you to play the character you want.
I prefer leaving them blank myself. Path of War is already one of the most different Pathfinder products I have ever seen, and I doubt that there being blank space next to a trait's name is going to make people not want to buy it.
But if they were to label these traits, they might as well make up 2 labels that are unique to the traits, that way they are always compatible with everything. That way, the system is completely disregarded (As it should be) while still following the (bad) rules.
To be honest, I absolutely do no care whatsoever if the traits are untyped or typed. We ignore those rules anyway and find them to be pretty stupid.
It's not like they rewrote the godawful underwater rules, or illusion mechanics. They didn't perform a "stealth fix." All they did was put in 2 traits that allow you to play the character you want.
So it wouldn't hurt to publish like the game rules expect? Thank you for helping me prove my point.
But they are making "stealth fixes", when questioned about design choices they very often resort to "we find the current rules lacking" of not something less polite about them. Which means they are trying to correct the core rules in their material. I don't need them doing that, out group is very capable of making changes as needed. All I need is mechanics that play well and don't disrupt the existing rules, so that the changes we have already made aren't screwed with and force us to have to make fixes again.
The traits aren't necessarily the issue, but they are definitely a symptom of the overall view of the designers of PoW. I'm not particularly interested in how they run their games and if they like the rules set, nor am I interested in mechanics that challenge the existing rules that my group is happy using. I'm in no need of a book of mechanics interjected with house rules which they see as "fixes" to the rule set. Because that is exactly the reason being given for some questions asked on choices made.
The more and more this book of work is being talked about, the less and less I see it meeting the level of quality of work (both balance and compatiblity) that has been DSP's hallmark to date. That saddens me honestly. I'm fairly certain this last subscription will probably be my last PoW purchase. When design choices are questioned and the responses amount to "martials don't have nice things, they deserve them", "the core rules are lacking", "we don't have a problem with it potentially being this powerful because it could be doing so much more" and "our ideas are better than the core rules" there is going to be a problem with the product being "compatible" with the parent system. The product that is being put together by the PoW crew isn't the type of product I want and expect from DSP unfortunately. It is like they dumped out all the blocks on the floor, built a really cool block castle but left the mess of the blocks surrounding it. So I have to clean it up and make sense of the oddities and rules that don't fit into the core rules, when that is kind of their job as designers of material for this rule set.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To be honest, I absolutely do no care whatsoever if the traits are untyped or typed. We ignore those rules anyway and find them to be pretty stupid.
It's not like they rewrote the godawful underwater rules, or illusion mechanics. They didn't perform a "stealth fix." All they did was put in 2 traits that allow you to play the character you want.
So it wouldn't hurt to publish like the game rules expect? Thank you for helping me prove my point.
But they are making "stealth fixes", when questioned about design choices they very often resort to "we find the current rules lacking" of not something less polite about them. Which means they are trying to correct the core rules in their material. I don't need them doing that, out group is very capable of making changes as needed. All I need is mechanics that play well and don't disrupt the existing rules, so that the changes we have already made aren't screwed with and force us to have to make fixes again.
The traits aren't necessarily the issue, but they are definitely a symptom of the overall view of the designers of PoW. I'm not particularly interested in how they run their games and if they like the rules set, nor am I interested in mechanics that challenge the existing rules that my group is happy using. I'm in no need of a book of mechanics interjected with house rules which they see as "fixes" to the rule set. Because that is exactly the reason being given for some questions asked on choices made.
'Kaaay.
Here's the deal: we'd like the traits, which are both small, and not potent, to be accessible on any concept that needs them. This is because while being small and not potent, they're pretty vital for making certain concepts work! So we can either take the short and easy route to make them to what we want them to do - that is, define them as untyped and move on - or we can take a long, convoluted route to do the same thing, or we could define them in existing types and give up on letting them do what we want them to do.
We're not going to do that third one. At all. What you see as house rules, we see as making our RAW match our RAI. And if that rubs ya the wrong way, I'm sorry about that. But that's how we're going to play it, and since the simple option is there, we're gonna take it. Aight?
So it wouldn't hurt to publish like the game rules expect? Thank you for helping me prove my point.
What about the people who's GMs follow the obnoxious trait rules to the letter? labeling these traits would be an incredible disservice to them. No matter which decision DSP makes, someone will be unhappy. I'd rather go with the least restrictive side.
But they are making "stealth fixes", when questioned about design choices they very often resort to "we find the current rules lacking" of not something less polite about them. Which means they are trying to correct the core rules in their material. I don't need them doing that, out group is very capable of making changes as needed. All I need is mechanics that play well and don't disrupt the existing rules, so that the changes we have already made aren't screwed with and force us to have to make fixes again.
To be fair, they aren't making this product just for your group.
Though I will bite. What rules did your group fix that PoW throws in a tizzy?
The traits aren't necessarily the issue, but they are definitely a symptom of the overall view of the designers of PoW. I'm not particularly interested in how they run their games and if they like the rules set, nor am I interested in mechanics that challenge the existing rules that my group is happy using. I'm in no need of a book of mechanics interjected with house rules which they see as "fixes" to the rule set. Because that is exactly the reason being given for some questions asked on choices made.
Again, they are not writing this product for your group. If they wrote this product for any specific group, it would be a bad product. There is no one way to play. Stop citing your group as the reason why you want PoW to change. Give actual reasons on why you disagree with things.
If I remember correctly he's the guy who was super duper against skill checks vs CMD a few months ago.
Also hasn't it been stated that Path of War has a different balance point than the usual DSP stuff, so what's new?
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If I remember correctly he's the guy who was super duper against skill checks vs CMD a few months ago.
Also hasn't it been stated that Path of War has a different balance point than the usual DSP stuff, so what's new?
I'm going to do something I rarely do (and truthfully have tried really hard not to do since joining the DSP lineup), and get involved in one of these conversations.
First,the Path of War team has never stated that PW or PW:E has a different balance expectation than other DSP materials.
You know what, I just realized this will be way too long to type from my phone, one second while I go to my laptop and I'm going to edit and finish this.
***
And back. Okay, the PW team has never stated that PW or PW:E has a different balance expectation than other DSP materials, but they have stated that the classes are designed to out perform core classes they have found to be lacking, are instead intended to perform at the level of classes they view as well-designed, such as the Magus, Inquisitor, Bard, and a few others. Classes they view as underpowered include the Fighter (he is, but not in the actual numbers that make up his damage-dealing capability), the Rogue (Paizo agreed), and the Monk (Paizo agreed). Sometimes they got it right on the head, sometimes they missed, like with Primal Fury which they're currently trying to hammer into some semblance of order via errata and similar methods.
Now, exactly how to go about fixing martial characters is a matter of some debate, and one which is always fairly controversial. Some of you may remember this post from about two years ago when Prince was fresh on the scene and I very politely told him to pull his head out of his ass and learn how to design for the system he's f#@$ing supporting, and that he was screwing his own product over with the attitude he was expressing. In my opinion, he listened, and while he and I don't always agree on the definition of "balanced", I've seen him make something he was really proud of and then politely listen as I tore the living shit out of it (some of you may remember the earlier iterations of the Harbinger). He took that criticism with good grace and then came back and made something much more solid out of it. His growth as a designer and the success of his products has been so stupendous, that Jeremy and Andreas brought him on as a full member of the Dreamscarred staff, and rightly so. This idea that if "the real DSP guys" were aware of what the PW:E team was they'd be stopping it is pretty much willful ignorance, and terrifically insulting.
Back on subject here - "fixing" martial characters and martial combat is freaking hard, and that's coming from someone who's written two Endzeitgeist 5 star reviewed books presenting martial options that I thought helped address the problem. Everyone's got a different view on the subject. Now (I'm about to piss you off Prince, remember that we're friends) do I think that skill checks vs. CMD were the wrong way to address the problem? Yes. Just recently I was kind of a toolbag in another thread where I stated unequivocally that you can't fix CMB/CMD by throwing numbers at it. Do I think that untyped traits are a bad idea? Yeah, not because it's broken, but because it invites knowledgeable reviewers and utter douches alike to come in and point at it as an example of why the product "isn't as good as it could be". It has almost no impact on the game itself, but it's an inconsistency that stands out like a sore thumb and just begs to be used against the designers in discussions like this.
Having said that, those are also both perfectly logical design decisions. Skills vs. CMD is a precedent set in the original Tome of Battle (obviously CMD wasn't a thing then, but the principles were the same), and it makes for an easy way to use combat maneuvers that will actually be competitive against all those CR 9+ critters in the various Bestiaries. The downside is that it breaks in the other direction and creates auto-successes against PC opponents, but that's largely a fault of the system itself. Remember, this is the same system where a hill giant with a coin flip's chance of hitting a pixie with his club can pluck a pouch off its belt almost every single time. The fix is part of the system itself: what's good for the goose is good for the gander, i.e. if you've got initiating heroes, you should have initiating enemies as well. Don't give the party toys you aren't going to play with.
On the untyped traits part: the PW:E team wants the traits to be available restriction free. That was their choice, and their options were either to not type the trait, or create an entirely new type of trait, which is really exactly the same thing as option 1. Maybe the reality is that if those are intended to not conflict with other traits they shouldn't be traits at all, but it literally took 30 seconds to look at them and say "That's obviously a combat trait, and that's obviously a social trait". Boom, now the typeless traits I didn't like are fixed. It's not that hard to see that okay, their design philosophy on this product is a little different than I'd like, but this is an easy disagreement to address.
Traits, CMB/CMD, feats, and a number of the other systems used in PW and PW:E disproportionately affect martial characters, for good or ill. Magic users just flip those systems the bird and say "Screw it, I'll just use a spell that doesn't need to worry about all that mess". The Path of War team doesn't get to just write a bunch of spells though, they have to work with martial systems because they're making martial characters. It's going to be impossible for everyone to agree on how they can go about fixing it, because no one quite agrees on what the problem is (Prince and I have this conversation about once a month or so, and it generally ends with one of us changing the conversation without having agreed on any of the points we argued about). What we can do though, is express our opinions without being dicks and impugning the credibility or talent of the people we're talking to. I swear it's possible, I saw my grandpa do it all the time when I was growing up. So lets try to express our opinions, because when it comes to things like what type a trait should be they are opinions, you're not going to be able to mathematically prove that making those traits untyped breaks the system, we do it without implying that they're not "real" designers, with some reasoned discourse, and accept that we're not the only ones whose opinion the PW team are listening to, and if this thread has shown anything, it's that they are listening.
Also hasn't it been stated that Path of War has a different balance point than the usual DSP stuff, so what's new?
Can't remember ever seeing that. And while PoW:E classes are a bit higher in the tier list than PoW ones thanks to supernatural class features and disciplines, they are still miles away from T2 which includes things like master summoner and spontaneous full casters.