|
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.
Holy balls, I barely got the edit to that last post in within the hour.
Anyways, to this one-
Point 1- Tier is only a linear scale that measures utility. Classes should be viewed on an X/Y axis that measures both utility, and proficiency within its role. Saying something's not like one of the most ridiculously powerful (and widely banned) things in the game does not automatically mean that said thing isn't game-breaking or disruptive in its own way (which is not to ascribe those descriptions to any of the PW:E products either, just a general statement).
Point 2- Yeah, they definitely never said the products were meant to be balanced any differently than other DSP products, though they did say that they were not balanced to the three least versatile and effective classes in the game, classes which Paizo themselves recently released massive fixes for that drastically improved their power and performance.
I apologize for making an untrue statement. The Path of War devs never stated that the target mark was different from usual DSP materials.
With the exception of the casting Prestige Classes I don't believe much in Path of War 1 or E manages to ever touch Tier 2. I do believe the Path of War material just about dominates tier 3 and 4 though because honestly unless you absolutely min-max specific paizo classes they don't stand a chance in a competition.
@Ssalarn
I was a huge fan of the following story and due to how hilarious I found it, I may have embellished it at some point along the way.
I remember you wanted to run a Path of War class and your DM was like "nah, too strong" and you told him Cavaliers have higher DPR due to mounted charges. He didn't believe you and said you wouldn't get enough opportunities to charge to pull that kind of DPR off, so you ran a Gnome Cavalier next game and showed him just how crazy the DPR olympics could be with small mounted chargers. After some of that he was like "Ok, you can run Path of War, but no mounts please."
And now we have a class template and several archetypes combining mounted charges and maneuvers. The scariest of which being the Omen Rider which gets Int modifier to damage rolls (x3 with spirited charge), a 50% miss chance for himself and his flying horse after moving, and access to boosts+maneuvers.
Currently the Path of War team is working on putting the 1 remaining base class of Expanded and the class templates into working order, so I know the mounted combat subsystem and archetype section are on the backburner till that's complete. Though I imagine the Hussar may need future revisions if that subsystem gets reworked.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Ssalarn
I was a huge fan of the following story and due to how hilarious I found it, I may have embellished it at some point along the way.I remember you wanted to run a Path of War class and your DM was like "nah, too strong" and you told him Cavaliers have higher DPR due to mounted charges. He didn't believe you and said you wouldn't get enough opportunities to charge to pull that kind of DPR off, so you ran a Gnome Cavalier next game and showed him just how crazy the DPR olympics could be with small mounted chargers. After some of that he was like "Ok, you can run Path of War, but no mounts please."
And now we have a class template and several archetypes combining mounted charges and maneuvers. The scariest of which being the Omen Rider which gets Int modifier to damage rolls (x3 with spirited charge), a 50% miss chance for himself and his flying horse after moving, and access to boosts+maneuvers.
Currently the Path of War team is working on putting the 1 remaining base class of Expanded and the class templates into working order, so I know the mounted combat subsystem and archetype section are on the backburner till that's complete. Though I imagine the Hussar may need future revisions if that subsystem gets reworked.
Oh, hell yeah, that story is absolutely true and pretty much word for word. I can't remember what level we were at, but I also showed him the build through level 20 where I was going to be able to consistently hit over 1,000 damage every round, and later when I used that same build to show how Paizo's ruling that both mount and rider have to use the charge action could be interpreted as giving me two charge attacks a round thanks to the Coordinated Charge teamwork feat, effectively doubling my original DPR numbers. Dude let me play a Warder like *snaps fingers* that.
When they were designing the Hussar and Piercing Thunder, I literally put like 30 comments on the maneuvers and stuff that were all some version "Mounted combat doesn't need any more damage, more utility please". I'm pretty sure I also said it in this thread where I was talking about how this was a great opportunity for mounted pole-vaulting, lots and lots of combat maneuvers for tripping, dragging, dirty tricking, repositioning, bull rushing, etc. I think a lot of my input got nixed with the reply "the discipline needs to be useable on and off a mount", but to me that kind of means that maybe what you really need is either two different disciplines, or for the maneuvers to have different effects based on whether or not you're mounted. 100% agreed that even with the team's clarifications that maneuver damage dice aren't multiplied, the damage from Piercing Thunder is still excessive and unnecessary (though I'm starting to get really nervous that I'm going to have some very angry colleagues looking for me in the near future.....). Mounted combat already enabled the highest single target damage strikes in the game, what really needs to be baked into the disciplines and classes/archetypes supporting it are more utility, ways to mitigate terrain, ways to impact the battlefield other than by dealing damage (or alongside dealing damage), etc.
The post wasn't meant to be accusatory or imply that they weren't talented.
It was meant to point out that the company they are producing this under has a very very long history of putting out extremely high quality material, which I now expect. Design choices and statements made by the team working on this are at odds with that expectation. That was all.
Maybe I'm being a super critical a*!!~$&, I'm fine with people thinking that if it makes them feel better. What I don't have to be fine with is a book that seems to have more than a little "power creep" in comparison to the first, rules that I don't agree with that could have been implemented in more "compatible" ways with the core rules and assumptions, which I already paid for expecting more attention to details and higher compatibility with the core rules which I play with. Like I have always gotten from this company before.
And to make sure it isn't out of context, the decision to make a "new" untyped trait type is the easy way out. As Prince already said, they must have considered how else to do it, which was "convoluted". So instead of making it play nice with the rules, they decided to take the "lazy" way out and make them the special snowflakes of the trait world.
And that is a prime example of the type of thing DSP doesn't do.
I'm sure that if you provide a non-convoluted way to have two traits, both of which look Combat, to be available to the same character, DSP would listen.
Speaking of power creep, I've asked on gitp before, but didn't get any answer. Please explain the thought process behind Fetch's Wrath (Mirror 4) range compared to Flicker Strike (Moon 4) range, and Mirror Demon's Waltz (Mirror 7) range compared to Fade Through (Moon 7) range.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ultimate Psionics has psionic traits & dream traits. Just create new categories, who cares? Maneuver traits, Martial traits.
I'm sure Paizo will come up with some psychic magic traits if their new system is different enough from regular magic.
I'm expecting some akashic traits as well. =)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've got a new combat trait here for people. Please let me know what you think and what needs to be corrected.
Combat Training [combat]: You learn one first level maneuver from any one discipline of your choice. This maneuver can be readied, initiated and recovered as normal, but it does not add that discipline to your discipline list nor can it be exchanged when swapping new maneuvers known. If you are not an initiating class you can recover this maneuver by spending a move action.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding the trait issue, as far as I can see the problem is that although a certain trait would fit perfectly into the Combat category, the designing team does not want to restrict the use of other Combat traits in tandem. So why not go the "adopted" route. Adopted is a trait that serves as a proxy to circunvent some existing trait limitations. Make a regional trait that focuses on being from a land eternally or constantly in strife/war, and have said trait give you acces to an extra combat one. That way you can not only have your cake and eat it to, but also enhance the game as a whole (more than once I have found myself wanting to take more than one combat trait in general).
Regarding the just posted trait, recovering it as a move action facilitates spamming he maneuver every round, when, for a trait, using a maneuver once per combat seems more than enough.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As far as Mounted Combat goes, we're going to sit down and decide what to do on that and Ssalarn is definitely getting invited to this party. Maneuver users get far more terrifying when it gets turned into a horse and pony show.
Anyhow...
I'm sure that if you provide a non-convoluted way to have two traits, both of which look Combat, to be available to the same character, DSP would listen.
Speaking of power creep, I've asked on gitp before, but didn't get any answer. Please explain the thought process behind Fetch's Wrath (Mirror 4) range compared to Flicker Strike (Moon 4) range, and Mirror Demon's Waltz (Mirror 7) range compared to Fade Through (Moon 7) range.
Clarify please. This is something that Knives and I will have to discuss as I wrote Moon and he wrote Mirror.
-X
Clarify please. This is something that Knives and I will have to discuss as I wrote Moon and he wrote Mirror.
Both level 4 maneuvers are standard actions, both level 7 maneuvers are swift actions.
Mirror 4 have range of medium (170ft when first obtained), Moon 4 have range of move + move. It might be argued that teleport-strike-teleport is better than teleport-strike or strike-teleport, even with lower range.Mirror 7 have range of long (920ft when first obtained) versus Moon 7 double movespeed, and it have additional effects.
What am I trying to say is that Mirror maneuvers' range look way too high, especially when there is Moon, which looks move focused on teleports overall.
I've got a new combat trait here for people. Please let me know what you think and what needs to be corrected.
Combat Training [combat]: You learn one first level maneuver from any one discipline of your choice. This maneuver can be readied, initiated and recovered as normal, but it does not add that discipline to your discipline list nor can it be exchanged when swapping new maneuvers known. If you are not an initiating class you can recover this maneuver by spending a move action.
I am a huge fan of this trait. I can't really see any way to abuse it, either. I think it is definitely better for non-initiators, but I am sure that is entirely the point.
Also, if you guys do change your mind on the trait labeling issue, I think having one be a [Discipline] trait and the other be an [Initiator] trait could work. Heck, if you wanted to really push it, Combat Training could be a [Maneuver] trait.
At that point we're already at 1/4 of my proposed goal of my previously jokingly stated new category of Martial Traits but then you'd be in the same boat of locked into only one from that group. I disagree with this ruling heartily. I think they should be all be untyped but whatever.
-X
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am a huge fan of this trait. I can't really see any way to abuse it, either.I've got a new combat trait here for people. Please let me know what you think and what needs to be corrected.
Combat Training [combat]: You learn one first level maneuver from any one discipline of your choice. This maneuver can be readied, initiated and recovered as normal, but it does not add that discipline to your discipline list nor can it be exchanged when swapping new maneuvers known. If you are not an initiating class you can recover this maneuver by spending a move action.
If you can't find some way to abuse it, I wrote it wrong :P
At that point we're already at 1/4 of my proposed goal of my previously jokingly stated new category of Martial Traits but then you'd be in the same boat of locked into only one from that group. I disagree with this ruling heartily. I think they should be all be untyped but whatever.
-X
Don't get me wrong. I prefer untyped traits as a whole. I was just throwing out suggestions for in case you guys ever had to label them, but wanted to keep them open to everyone. I always found trait categories to be the dumbest thing about them.
And Elric, it is probably because I don't consider many 1st level maneuvers a problem. In fact shards of iron strike and flurry strike are probably being errataed at some point.
Most 1st level maneuvers really aren't a problem. Even Shards of Iron Strike and Flurry Strike aren't that bad (slap a -2 penalty on flurry strike and it's fine). I came up with this trait while talking with my DM about adding maneuvers to enemies, and how it just isn't worth it to add class levels to mook monsters, but it'd still be nice if they did something interesting.
I've got a new combat trait here for people. Please let me know what you think and what needs to be corrected.
Combat Training [combat]: You learn one first level maneuver from any one discipline of your choice. This maneuver can be readied, initiated and recovered as normal, but it does not add that discipline to your discipline list nor can it be exchanged when swapping new maneuvers known. If you are not an initiating class you can recover this maneuver by spending a move action.
At the risk of asking a dumb question, how do you "ready a maneuver (...) as normal" if you don't have a mechanic that lets you ready a maneuver?
Yeah, I foresee it just getting a -2. Though Broken Blade granting +2 damage when used with discipline weapons will probably die, since it has surprisingly powerful discipline weapons. In Shards of Iron Strike, my only complaint is that it is auto-stagger.
Also that is an interesting inspiration. I personally just break the rules and give them a free counter and a few free strikes of low levels.
... Was... my post and response to it deleted by a mod...? Why? All I was doing was telling someone not to make assumptions about me, and clarifying that all I want is for the PrC to actually be a PrC with a running theme that links everything together, instead of just the collect of parts that it currently is.
Just repost your feedback with absolutely no mention of previous posts being deleted and do not argue with mods.
Anyway, I disagree with your feedback. Landsnecht has 1 theme that every class feature works towards. Getting einhander style operational.
At the risk of asking a dumb question, how do you "ready a maneuver (...) as normal" if you don't have a mechanic that lets you ready a maneuver?I've got a new combat trait here for people. Please let me know what you think and what needs to be corrected.
Combat Training [combat]: You learn one first level maneuver from any one discipline of your choice. This maneuver can be readied, initiated and recovered as normal, but it does not add that discipline to your discipline list nor can it be exchanged when swapping new maneuvers known. If you are not an initiating class you can recover this maneuver by spending a move action.
Not a dumb question at all. Perfectly valid. I missed that bit when I posted it this morning and I've updated the trait since then in the feats document, but I'll repost it here:
Combat Training [combat]: You learn one first level maneuver (strike, boost or counter) from any one discipline of your choice. This maneuver can be readied, initiated and recovered as normal, but it does not add that discipline to your discipline list nor can it be exchanged when swapping new maneuvers known. If you are not an initiating class you can ready this maneuver by spending 10 minutes practicing it and recover this maneuver by spending a standard action. Your initiation modifier is the same as the attribute modifier for the discipline skill associated with the discipline of the maneuver (for example, Acrobatics would be Dexterity).
|
Yeah, my Zealot Landsknecht is the only 1H w/o TWF character I've ever actually considered playing. Was actually considering going Half-elf instead of Human and using Ancestral Arms to do the whole deal with a Falcata, or at least switching Blade of Mercy and Enforcer for Reactionary and EWP: Falcata.
15 ft. reach, great maneuvers, 1.5x Str to attacks, can still do all that damage while grappled/swallowed whole/etc, getting all the Zealot's neat class features (Zeal is amazing for AoO builds because you're already full BAB but get Zeal on top of that). You could also shift his focus to be more on group stuff (access to Golden Lion is money!) and still take plenty of advantage of the AoO focus.
Really, I don't see what's so wrong with Landsknecht. It does what it says on the tin. It takes awhile to get going, of course (during which you can 2H your 1H weapon and still get all the benefits) but it's hardly a mishmash of disjointed class abilities.
Alright alright alright! I get it already! I'm the only one that thinks this way! I get it! I've already acknowledged that my opinion isn't going to change things, because everyone else for some reason things that the class has a running theme in it and is a wonderful class despite the strong dijoint between several of its abilities and its MADness!
|
|
Lots of classes are MAD, but Landsknecht isn't particularly more MAD than others. With a D10 HD and good Fort save, you can really squeak by with 12 Con, which means all you really need is Str, Dex and your initiation modifier. This isn't really much more MAD than usual, and you can always go 18 Str/12-14 Dex and grab a Str/Dex belt (which is generally what CaGM Barbarians do) and go to town.
A solid 20PB array for a Landsknecht, before racials, is 16, 15, 14, 12, 10, 7 or 16, 14, 14, 12, 10, 8 arranged however makes you happy.
Not a dumb question at all. Perfectly valid.
Good! I'm still fairly new to Dreamscarred material so I wasn't sure if the answer had already been covered somewhere else.
About a week back I had a very uneventful shift, so I spent the night reading through Piercing Thunder and making first impression notes. I posted it in the OotS thread, but no one else is/was talking about Piercing Thunder so I was a little worried it was missed - that thread moves fast! The original post can be found here. Most of the notes were taken after 4 AM, so please feel free to ignore any feedback that slips into sleep-induced idiocy. :)
Bronze Lancet Charge/Piercing Strike/Bronze Lancer's Edge: These all feel a bit too samey. They're all variations on "make an attack/charge and add 1D6 damage". It'd be nice if one of these stood out a bit more - maybe make Piercing Strike interact with AoOs somehow? Bronze Lancer's Edge is a boost, so I think it should be Range: Personal.
Oaken Shield: Cool ability. Maybe clarify how long the +4 shield bonus lasts - is it meant to only affect a single attack?
Dismounting Thrust: Slightly misleading name since this maneuver also works on unmounted targets. Suggest change.
Hastened Leap: Very cool. Missing a word. "as a swift action, you may initiate this boost move up".
Armor Piercing Thrust: Cool ability. For some reason I was thinking this should interact differently with DR, probably because of the name.
Brace for Impact: Powerful, but feels a little bit too circumstantial since it only works on Charges.
Throwing Thunder: Very cool.
Slayer's Stance: Cool stance. Should be renamed Twin Thunder. Because Twin Thunder. This is where I noticed my handwriting started going downhill. Sure sign that I'm in the 4AM-6AM.
Iron Lancer's Edge: What happens if the charge attack misses? Is the target still staggered?
Goring Strike: Very cool. What happens if your line intersects with two squares occupied by a large creature? What if it only intersects with one of the squares occupied by a large creature?
Repositioning Leap: Cool.
Leaping Strike: Awesome.
Twisting Lance: Misspelled Competence.
Stance of the Thunder Brand: Seems to use 'and' a lot. Suggested rephrase to "...You deal an additional 3d6 points of damage, gain a +2 dodge bonus to AC, and gain a +5-ft increase to your weapon's reach."
Throwing Comet: Can we change this name? Just reversing the words and using Comet Throw sounds better to me. Appears to have misspelled 'hurl' as 'hurt'.
Twisting Parry: Awesome!
Meteor Spiral Thrust: Any chance we can rearrange the words here? Spiral Meteor Thrust sounds better to me.
Lightning Rush: Suggest changing "you" to "yourself" in "...you are able to grant you an additional..." Changes from "you" to "its" about halfway through the final paragraph.
Glorious Thunder Charge: This seems worse than Meteor Spiral Thrust, which is lower level - I'd rather inflict D3 Daze than D3 Nausea.
Steel Lancer's Edge: This is a strike that has Target: You. Not sure if intentional?
Breaking the Charge: More like this! I like Piercing Thunder, but I think it could capitalize better on the main advantage of spears and polearms - superior reach. This is the first maneuver I think really takes advantage of reach.
Thundering Lancer's Blow: Very minor thing, but maybe change "reduce" to "bring" in the first sentence?
Piercing Charge of the Dread Lancer: Very cool.
Not a dumb question at all. Perfectly valid.Good! I'm still fairly new to Dreamscarred material so I wasn't sure if the answer had already been covered somewhere else.
About a week back I had a very uneventful shift, so I spent the night reading through Piercing Thunder and making first impression notes. I posted it in the OotS thread, but no one else is/was talking about Piercing Thunder so I was a little worried it was missed - that thread moves fast! The original post can be found here. Most of the notes were taken after 4 AM, so please feel free to ignore any feedback that slips into sleep-induced idiocy. :)
** spoiler omitted **...
Thank you for the feedback. Some of this was already incorporated from one of my editors here but I made some tweaks. Thanks for the support and the read through!
-X
Proposed change to Fiend's Grip wording on the warder archetype "Fiendbound Marauder"
I too, am somewhat saddened. >Crosses fingers, hopes not to die< How about a language change to something along the lines of "The Fiend's Grip may take one of two forms. The first is a brutish claw, which does 1d10 points of damage (for a medium creature). This claw possesses the grab natural weapon quality and does Bludgeoning and Slashing damage, and inflicts x3 damage on a confirmed critical. The second is that of a cruel whip of blades and tendons. It deals 1d6 points of damage (when manifested by a medium creature). It possesses the trip and disarm weapon qualities, and does slashing and piercing damage, and threatens a critical on a roll of 19 or 20, and has a reach of +15 feet. While manifested, the fiend's grip subsumes a wielded one-handed melee weapon, gaining any enhancement bonus, magic weapon qualities or special materials possessed by the weapon. The Fiend's grip is both a natural and a manufactured weapon. You may make iterative attacks with it as a manufactured weapon, and if you possess it as your sole natural weapon, it gains 1-1/2 times strength to damage. You may manifest one fiend's grip for each arm you possess."
Currently:
Fiend’s Grip (Su): The signature feature of fiendbound marauders is the ability to manifest an oversized, spiny spectral claw, often wrapped in barbed chains. To manifest a Fiend’s Grip, the character must be wearing gauntlets or spiked gauntlets that act as a channel for the marauder’s weapon to come into the world, and he may only manifest one Fiend’s Grip for each gauntleted hand he possesses. The fiendbound marauder may manifest his Fiend’s Grip as a move action and dismiss it as a free action. He may treat the Fiend's Grip as a spiked gauntlet that possesses the reach, grapple, and disarm weapon properties. This weapon also threatens creatures adjacent to him, unlike with most reach weapons. This weapon inflicts damage as weapons two size categories larger than the manifester and threatens a critical hit on 20 with a x2 multiplier on successful critical confirmation. The Fiend’s Grip is treated as both a manufactured light weapon or a natural weapon for the purposes of feats, spells and other effects. The damage dealt is either bludgeoning or piercing and slashing, at the character’s option. This hand always counts as a magical weapon, regardless of its enhancement bonus (if any).
When attacking with the Fiend’s Grip, the fiendbound marauder may apply any material properties of any one gauntlet or spiked gauntlet he is wearing, as well as any enhancement bonus or magical properties that it may also possess. As a supernatural ability, Fiend’s Grip does not provoke attacks of opportunity and cannot be counterspelled or dispelled when manifested, however it does not function within an antimagic field. If disarmed or sundered, the spectral weapon disappears and may be called once more on the marauder’s next turn (unless the physical gauntlet the character is wearing is sundered or otherwise removed, then the Fiend’s Grip may not be recalled until this is replaced). This replaces the warder’s aegis and clad in steel class features.
Thoughts? Votes?
-X
|
|
I personally think Sayt's option is really cool, but it's pretty clearly stronger than the current option (1d10/20/x3 B&S w/ grab OR 1d6/19-20/x2 P&S w/ trip/disarm and extra reach is pretty strictly better than 1d8/20/x2 B or P w/ grapple/disarm/reach) but I figure you could probably hammer the numbers into place pretty easily.
Hmm, I'm gonna do some tweaks I think to the existing grip as it stands.
Edit: Added Canny Pugilist class feature for Fiendbound Marauder, replacing Tactical Acumen.
-X
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe you want "focus" instead of channel in the second sentence.
Also, you might want to check your wording for the sizing depending on what you want it to potentially stack with. With the semi recent FAQ on sizes from Paizo things could get messy or more restrictive than you intended.
I believe you want "focus" instead of channel in the second sentence.
Also, you might want to check your wording for the sizing depending on what you want it to potentially stack with. With the semi recent FAQ on sizes from Paizo things could get messy or more restrictive than you intended.
Good point. I'll just say it's a d8 plus Strength mod for Medium sized characters and call it good, and let the player's figure out size modifications from there.
-X
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On that note, are Fiendbound Marauder and Zweihander Sentinel compatible? They don't seem to change anything that makes them incompatible (ZS trades BB for ST, FM trades GL and IT for EG and CR) but the FM doesn't have the Aegis class feature, so I don't know if ZS's Zweihander Training would actually do anything.
That wording should clear up the problems with the wording that the old version had with the entire dual form (gauntlet/whip), as well as allowing you to still get effective weapons via wbl.
|
|
On that note, are Fiendbound Marauder and Zweihander Sentinel compatible? They don't seem to change anything that makes them incompatible (ZS trades BB for ST, FM trades GL and IT for EG and CR) but the FM doesn't have the Aegis class feature, so I don't know if ZS's Zweihander Training would actually do anything.
** spoiler omitted **
No, they both alter the Aegis class feature.
Thank you for the feedback. Some of this was already incorporated from one of my editors here but I made some tweaks. Thanks for the support and the read through!
-X
Happy to help, and thanks for taking my feedback into consideration! :)
|
|
No, they both alter the Aegis class feature.On that note, are Fiendbound Marauder and Zweihander Sentinel compatible? They don't seem to change anything that makes them incompatible (ZS trades BB for ST, FM trades GL and IT for EG and CR) but the FM doesn't have the Aegis class feature, so I don't know if ZS's Zweihander Training would actually do anything.
** spoiler omitted **
Yeah, somebody mentioned that on GitP. A shame!
I'm most familiar with the Warlord, so I'll focus on the Warlord options:
Aasimar Warlord: Add +1 foot to the range of the warlord’s tactical presence.
Circumstantially useful I guess? It's already 30 feet, increasing it doesn't seem vastly useful.
Dwarf Warlord: Add +⅕ to the bonus to saves granted by the warlord’s tactical presence.
I like this, but I'm wondering if we could tweak the numbers and the presence options a little bit? Indomitable and Taskmaster's Presence seems like perfect fits for a dwarf warlord. Maybe 1/3 to the bonus to saves, but only when in Indomitable or Taskmaster's Presence? 1/3 matches the Superstitious progression (but the effects are more narrow in scope) and really helps capture the legendary dwarven stubbornness doughtiness.
Elan Warlord: Add +¼ to the number of uses per day of the warlord’s warleader ability.
This is the first one that's left me cold, and unfortunately it's repeated for quite a few races. It may just be because my warlord is still fairly low level (6) and spending a standard action on Warleader is unappealing, but I've never come anywhere near running out of Warleader uses. I can't imagine picking this option.
Elf Warlord: Warlord: Add +⅓ to the number of uses per day of the warlord’s warleader ability.
Is it intentional that elves get 1/3 uses, while elans and half-elves get 1/4? Seems odd.
Gnome Warlord: Warlord: Add +¼ of a maneuver known from the Tempest Gale or Thrashing Dragon disciplines.
This is very cool. I was wondering if Veiled Moon could be an option? From my limited experience Veiled Moon is the most "trickster" discipline, which ties in well with the gnome aptitude for illusions and pranks.
Half-giant Warlord: Add +¼ of a maneuver known from the Golden Lion or Primal Fury disciplines
Again, very cool. :)
Halfling Warlord: Gain a +¼ circumstance bonus on all d20 rolls made during a warlord’s gambit.
Awesome! Only thing I'd consider changing is to make it 'increase your gambit bonus' rather than be a circumstance bonus to tie into the halfling penchant for good luck.
Half-orc Warlord: Warlord: Add +¼ to the bonuses granted by the warlord’s battle prowess.
Awesome! Makes a lot of sense.
Warlord: Add +¼ of a maneuver known from the Golden Lion or Scarlet Throne disciplines
This one left me a little cold. It's not bad mechanically (I love GL and ST) but I'm not sure I see how it connects to humans?
Gambits
New gambits, awesome! Flanker's Gambit seems to be the equivalent of the Pinhole Gambit for melee warlords, I'd be very tempted to pick this gambit on just about any warlord. Conversely I think Chessman, Oxen, and Battering Ram are all a bit too specific and narrow in scope. Any chance some of these could be combined?
Thieving gambit is hilarious. I'd suggest making it grant the target a bonus to damage rather than to hit. Angry and flustered people would probably try to hit harder - not more accurately.
Oxen has a minor typo, should be *feet* instead of *feat*.
Presences
Warning Presence is interesting, but I'm not sure a circumstantial bonus to reflex saves vs traps is attractive enough. Not sure how the bonus to saves works against attacks - is this meant to be a bonus to AC? I'd love to see this grant the warlord's charisma bonus to initiative checks, but that might be a bit too good. Maybe make it grant all allies within range Improved Initiative? Still a great option, but you don't have to worry about it stacking for initiative bonus hunters.
The flavor of Taskmaster's Presence is awesome, but the bonuses (fatigue, death effects, compulsion) are fairly similar to Indomitable Presence (fatigue, death effects, poison). I'd argue that Taskmaster is better, but the bonus feats are different enough that I think the two are balanced - some people love Diehard, some hate it. It doesn't seem to have a level listed?
Gladiator Presence is cool, but by level 9 I'd expect most people to already have a morale bonus to attacks. What if it also allowed all allies within range to use Combat Maneuvers without provoking AoOs?
|
|
This is the first one that's left me cold, and unfortunately it's repeated for quite a few races. It may just be because my warlord is still fairly low level (6) and spending a standard action on Warleader is unappealing, but I've never come anywhere near running out of Warleader uses. I can't imagine picking this option.
Elan Warlord: Add +¼ to the number of uses per day of the warlord’s warleader ability.
By the time you can pick up Coordinated Charge, or if you're a ranged Warlord Target of Opportunity, getting Warleader up is pretty much the best use you can make of your action. This is a seriously amazing option and I'd take it in a second.
I don't want to offend anyone, so let me be clear that the following statement contains hyperbole:
If you've got a class that gets free Teamwork feats, a way to share them with allies, and allies who can benefit from them, you're a moron if you don't use them.
Continuing with somewhat less hyperbole:
There's this attitude that Teamwork feats suck, and I can get why you'd think that, if you tested them out with your Fighter. On a Cavalier, Inquisitor, Hunter, Warlord, etc. though, they're some of the strongest abilities you have access to, and amazing force multipliers. Target of Opportunity, mentioned above, is an immediate action attack for every person who doesn't need to use their swift action on a given round, and it complements lots of different party compositions really well. Remember, the party wizard's scorching ray is a ranged attack. Coordinated Charge is even better if you have one or two other guys in the group who like to charge things, since you're trading an immediate action for a full round action. A Warlord in a party with a Barbarian can activate Warleader as a standard action, move into position, then when the Barbarian charges make his own charge attack, losing no action economy for activating his buff (and actually gaining an additional move out of the deal). Technically, if you want to dive down the rabbit hole, the Warlord's charge which was triggered by the Barbarian's charge then triggers an immediate action charge for the Barbarian which he can take to charge again. If your Barbarian has Pounce, you just traded 1 standard action for a full attack, a full round, and a move action, and you better believe you want to do that as often as possible. IF there's another melee capable party member on the field, or even just some summoned brute monsters, you may have potentially gotten even more full round actions out of the mix.
Technically, if you want to dive down the rabbit hole, the Warlord's charge which was triggered by the Barbarian's charge then triggers an immediate action charge for the Barbarian which he can take to charge again. If your Barbarian has Pounce, you just traded 1 standard action for a full attack, a full round, and a move action, and you better believe you want to do that as often as possible.
Teamwork feats are cheese! ;P
Seriously though, it does one well to not underestimate the power that they can grant. Obviously there are terrible ones too, but it is worth it giving up your precious actions sometimes.
I've made a terrible mistake.
This story is many things. A mistake is not one of those things. I found it highly entertaining!
Check it out.
-X
Wow! This is a meaty document. I am usually a hater of racial favored class bonuses, but these are great!
And all the PoW1 support is phenomenal! Truly a great addition to PoW: E.
Though the Half-Giant and Maenad favored class bonuses seem a but overpowered. They can get +10 to their allies, and their own attack roles with no effort using them.
After playing a Hunter I know the power of an Outflank+precise strike combo.
Ssalarn knows all about dem Teamwork feats gazes longingly at Battlelord
I wrote a really, really long post outlining why I find that Target of Opportunity (requires two dedicated ranged characters) and Coordinated Charge (requires three or more melee characters for a real benefit) are nowhere near as good as you seem to think they are, but after running through some examples I realize that the reason I dislike Warleader on my current warlord is that I'm in a party with four characters filling four very different roles. There aren't enough characters present for the force multiplication aspect of Warleader to become relevant compared to spending the bonus feats on Combat Feats and the standard and immediate actions on maneuvers, counters and boosts. I was wracking my brain to find a good TW feat at level 3 and the best thing I could come up with was Escape Route. :-/
However! There are many parties out there, and I have no reason not to believe you in that TW feats and Warleader provides a significant upside for your parties. I'll probably never use extra Warleader uses FCB, but as long as other people do then they're fulfilling their purpose. :)
All that said, I really wouldn't mind if there was an otherwise minimal-invasive archetype for the Warlord that replaced Warleader with something more attractive for a Warleader in a small group.
I can't help you with a non-invasive archetype, but I can point you to a teamwork feat that works out for someone who wants to mostly ignore teamwork feats. It is called Shake It Off.
Basically, if someone in the party gets poisoned, you can activate shake it off and have the party collectively pat him on the back til he feels better. Works for when you are forced into fireball formation, or when all stuck behind a large piece of cover and facing foes with poisoned arrows. While both sound unlikely, they have certainly happened to my groups.
|
|
I can't help you with a non-invasive archetype, but I can point you to a teamwork feat that works out for someone who wants to mostly ignore teamwork feats. It is called Shake It Off.
Basically, if someone in the party gets poisoned, you can activate shake it off and have the party collectively pat him on the back til he feels better. Works for when you are forced into fireball formation, or when all stuck behind a large piece of cover and facing foes with poisoned arrows. While both sound unlikely, they have certainly happened to my groups.
Yeah, Shake it Off, Escape Route, Stealth Synergy, Paired Opportunists, and Precise Strike are all pretty decent general use Teamwork feats. Stealth Synergy even has the advantage of being primarily used out of combat, so it doesn't interfere with your in-combat actions if that's a concern, and it helps prevent splitting the party.
There's some other Teamwork feats that are specifically intended for parties of characters with mixed skills that are also pretty decent:
Intercept Charge can be a really decent trick for protecting allied spellcasters or squishier skill-monkey types, and leaves the enemy stuck nose-to-nose with the Warlord when the warlord's next turn starts.
Distracting Charge can be a good way for Primal Fury types to help their allies hit against high AC foes, since it's a typeless bonus to whatever their next attack roll is, whether it be melee, ranged, ranged touch, etc.
Broken Wing Gambit / Wounded Paw Gambit can be really handy, particularly since the opponent's attack against you doesn't need to be successful to trigger the feats. These pair great with counters.
Outflank is just plain good. This one gets particularly nasty if you have a conjurer or summoner in the group dropping temporary meatshields and combat brutes, since it can help turn them from distractions into true threats.
Sheesh. You guys really want the Warder to gain Eternal Guardian and Piercing Thunder don't you? Considering that the base one makes you chose between both, and two out of its three base archetypes also has you add one or the other... couldn't you change that up a bit? Because Devish Defender and Ziehander Sentinal are VERY different classes!
Also. I LOVE Gladiator Presence! Honestly, your just giving me more and more reasons to play as a Vanguard Commander currently. What with the Iron Tortoise/Thrashing Dragon style feat combination allowing you to completely and utterly abuse shield bashing, and the Malestorm Shield being a +1 Heavy Bashing Shield that lets you make a free-action trip attempt when you make a shield-bash!
Actually that brings up a question. Now, I am to understand that Pathfinder has a rule that you can have an a ability score more than once to a single check. But what if the bonuses are different? Gladiator Prescence gives you your charisma in CMB checks. Whilst Gambit's give you your charisma bonus to any d20 check you make for a Gambit, which for Sweeping Gambit, would be your trip attempt... would you get the Charisma twice, because its applying in two very different ways?
|
|
Actually that brings up a question. Now, I am to understand that Pathfinder has a rule that you can't have an a ability score more than once to a single check. But what if the bonuses are different? Gladiator Prescence gives you your charisma in CMB checks. Whilst Gambit's give you your charisma bonus to any d20 check you make for a Gambit, which for Sweeping Gambit, would be your trip attempt... would you get the Charisma twice, because its applying in two very different ways?
You can't stack the same ability bonus to the same roll, even if you're getting it two different ways. Ability bonuses are treated like typed bonuses in that way.
That being said, if you got something like a competence bonus equal to your Charisma bonus from one effect, and then added your Charisma bonus from another effect, that would stack.