I like a lot of the changes (and Initiator Mod to damage definitely feels at home on an 8th level stance with some other nice things to make it feel appropriately awesome), but I'm a little concerned by Initiator Mod to damage being left in a 3rd level stance. That still leaves it available from Martial Training III for Dex to Damage, which is just one more feat than before (and you're getting plenty of other nice things from those feats). Not sure if that's a real issue (that's expensive, feat wise) but the prospect of non-initiators that have more passive in-class methods of boosting damage output getting access to it makes my skin crawl.
Also, it seems like a lot of the maneuvers that deal direct damage are a bit on the weak side. You're giving up making archery full attacks for single shots, I get the sense they could stand to be a little more impressive.
What if you got said damage only on strikes?
Also Eye of the Storm is essentially a perfect 8th level stance in my eyes.
Potential edit to 9th level:
Vicious Tempest Volley
Tempest Gale (Strike)
Level: 9
Initiation Action: 1 full round action
Range: Ranged attack
Target: One or more creatures (see text)
Duration: InstantaneousUnleashing the might of the winds to carry his attacks throughout the battlefield, the Tempest Gale master launches a hail of arrows, bolts, stones or weapons to devastate his enemies. Make a number of ranged attacks equal to your initiation modifier at your full base attack bonus. During your full attack, each attack deals an additional 5d6 points of damage and you may add a free bull rush, dirty trick, disarm, sunder, or trip combat maneuver attempt for each of these attacks. These combat maneuver attempts do not provoke attacks of opportunity, and you can use your initiation modifier in place of your Strength modifier when calculating your CMB. At the end of these attacks, you may make a Sleight of Hand check in place of a Stealth check (if higher) and make a single move action to reposition yourself, gaining the benefits of the Hide in Plain Sight class feature until your next turn.
How's this look?
-X
Where is piercing thunder located at?
Also, I am not to keen on the use of Sleight of Hand. I think the maneuvers are a great idea for it. Especially since each attack is at your highest base attack bonus. This makes a mythic tier 6 character look bad if they were to focus on that precise strike ability, especially if they were a two weapon fighter.
A two weapon fighter at this level would have 7 attacks at a good base attack bonus.
Assuming a base dex of 18, 5 from levels, 6 from equipment we have a 29 (modifier of a 9).
Doing the same for him, and using this maneuver, he would be able to make 9 attacks.
I would make it be at a -4 penalty or their initiator level (my preference), and treat the weather as if it were a windstorm for 1 round.
This is my recommendation, please don't take offense :S
Unleashing the might of the winds to carry his attacks throughout the battlefield, the Tempest Gale master launches a hail of arrows, bolts, stones or weapons to devastate his enemies. Make a number of ranged attacks equal to your initiation modifier using your initiator level in place of your Base Attack Bonus. During your full attack, each attack deals an additional 5d6 points of damage and you may add a free bull rush, dirty trick, disarm, sunder, or trip combat maneuver attempt for each of these attacks. These combat maneuver attempts do not provoke attacks of opportunity, and you can use your initiation modifier in place of your Strength modifier when calculating your CMB. Afterwards. for one round, in a radius equal to the weapon's range increment the area is treated as if under the effects of a windstorm, making ranged attacks impossible and forcing creatures to be checked by size.
No offense taken my friend! That's why we do these open betas, you all make sure we don't make a terrible product!
I'm shopping your suggestion to the Giant in the Playground board as well, but I would like some clarification on what you're suggesting. Remove BAB + bonuses from the equation, and then use just your base IL + modifiers to that as your attack bonus? I can see how that could lower the over all attack bonus and lead to less hits. I haven't mathed my original 9th for Gale out yet fully so I don't know how well it will perform in actual game. Why remove the hiding feature? I understand the windstorm, its a neat idea if a bit supernatural.
-X
having done some maths, and gotten some feedback... your iteration Oliver has a pair of issues.
1st, the BAB thing is the same for full BAB IL's, the only difference is bonuses beyond that. If you're a multiclass character, especially with non-IL classes, you're getting way less. If you're a 3/4 BAB class like Mystic or Stalker, it's actually better.
2nd, your windstorm AE actually hurts you too.
-X
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Skills can be pumped way higher than attacks with items and feats (especially if they're also benefiting from your weapon bonus). As a result, mid to high level uses of "opposed skill check" maneuvers can easily end up in auto success territory. And skill checks versus other mechanics are generally much harder to predict the character to character benefits of, since skill bonuses at the same level vary more than any other mechanic in the game and can acquire huge bonuses.
So... just saying maybe be a little cautious about what maneuvers you put opposed skill checks on, because they're likely going to scale into auto success in the hands of good players.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you absolutely must have skill-association with maneuvers (which is a bad idea with the game's current skill metagame), perhaps consider something more reserved such as basing it off the number of RANKS in a skill, since that can't go higher than someone's BAB (but could make it attractive for non full-BAB classes who have maxed a skill such as Acrobatics). Alternatively giving a passive benefit based on a % (such as 1/2 or full) ranks in a skill to certain maneuvers might be okay.
But for the love, please stop with anything that involves "make a skill check" that's going to be opposed by any other mechanic in this game. It's sloppy and doesn't work.
Possible new Riven Hourglass 9th.
Split the Stream
Riven Hourglass (Boost)
Level: 9
Prerequisites: Four Riven Hourglass maneuvers
Initiation Action: 1 swift action
Range: Personal
Target: You
Duration: 1 + initiation modifier rounds
You tear your time-stream in two, rending reality asunder and bringing a duplicate of yourself into the world. The duplicate is identical to you in all ways and possess all of your attributes, abilities and items (except single-use or charged items that replicated spells with an XP cost or expensive material component cost). It fights under your control as an extension of your own consciousness and on your initiative count, for as long as it continues to exist. Maneuvers, spells, or other abilities used by the duplicate are used from your available stock and if used by the duplicate are expended. If you or the duplicate are reduced to 0 hit points or below, it immediately ceases to exist.
At the end of the effect (or when the duplicate vanishes, whichever comes first) you advance one temporary age category due to the chronological strain on your own timeline, although you do not gain the mental bonuses that this would normally entail (treat this as an age category advancement that vanishes the next time you take an 8-hour rest). If you were already Venerable, you are immediately reduced to 0 hit points and become unconscious upon the duplicate vanishing.
---
I worry that this is far, far stronger and I'm looking for ways to include limitations on the duplicate. Isolating it from your spells/maneuvers may be the best way to do it, then they're just limited to your feats and other abilities. Then maybe it's too weak. A suggestion was made that instead of reducing you to 0 hp and unconsciousness it kills you as your burn out your quintessence.
Thoughts?
-X
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So how would you feel about a fighter with grit and some deeds (nothing so extensive as to be compared with the gunslinger). Minor stuff, stuff a fighter -should- be able to do. I ask this because I've consulted Prince of Knives on it and he feels that its not a good plan. I look at it and it think that it "fixes" the class, but we're not necessarily here to do that. Between giving it up to 6th level maneuver access and some deeds and grit, I think to myself that fighter becomes a viable class in a game with martial initiators as well as spellcasting classes. Consider also that it trades out several of its bonus feats as opposed to stuff like weapon and armor training, so it makes itself available to many (like 90%) of the fighter archetypes out there.
Before I share a link to something, I would like some initial feedback to the pitch.
-X
Possible new Riven Hourglass 9th.
Split the Stream
Riven Hourglass (Boost)
Level: 9
Prerequisites: Four Riven Hourglass maneuvers
Initiation Action: 1 swift action
Range: Personal
Target: You
Duration: 1 + initiation modifier roundsYou tear your time-stream in two, rending reality asunder and bringing a duplicate of yourself into the world. The duplicate is identical to you in all ways and possess all of your attributes, abilities and items (except single-use or charged items that replicated spells with an XP cost or expensive material component cost). It fights under your control as an extension of your own consciousness and on your initiative count, for as long as it continues to exist. Maneuvers, spells, or other abilities used by the duplicate are used from your available stock and if used by the duplicate are expended. If you or the duplicate are reduced to 0 hit points or below, it immediately ceases to exist.
At the end of the effect (or when the duplicate vanishes, whichever comes first) you advance one temporary age category due to the chronological strain on your own timeline, although you do not gain the mental bonuses that this would normally entail (treat this as an age category advancement that vanishes the next time you take an 8-hour rest). If you were already Venerable, you are immediately reduced to 0 hit points and become unconscious upon the duplicate vanishing.
---
I worry that this is far, far stronger and I'm looking for ways to include limitations on the duplicate. Isolating it from your spells/maneuvers may be the best way to do it, then they're just limited to your feats and other abilities. Then maybe it's too weak. A suggestion was made that instead of reducing you to 0 hp and unconsciousness it kills you as your burn out your quintessence.
Thoughts?
-X
If you are worried about "power level" limit the max level maneuvers/stances you can use, fluff it as strain on your system as you maintain the ability. You have two separate entities drawing from the same pool, but the ability lasts long enough that you can recover maneuvers several times to set up some nasty combinations due to action economy and the like.
but the ability lasts long enough
I don't think enemies will last long enough. Without Split the Stream, Riven Hourglass adept has three standard actions during surprise round and two on the first round. With it, it almost doubles to five and four respectively, and that's without Sleeping Goddess Style trick. With that trick, it's five/six, and six on any following rounds. Not that it really matters as I really doubt anything level-appropriate survives even three strikes.
having done some maths, and gotten some feedback... your iteration Oliver has a pair of issues.
1st, the BAB thing is the same for full BAB IL's, the only difference is bonuses beyond that. If you're a multiclass character, especially with non-IL classes, you're getting way less. If you're a 3/4 BAB class like Mystic or Stalker, it's actually better.
2nd, your windstorm AE actually hurts you too.
-X
I agree with that, and that is the actual reason. This allows for those characters that stick with the path to be better.
A 20th level Mystic - 20th initiator and uses that, win.
A 18th level Mystic, 2nd level fighter - 18th initiator still a very good thing compared to a base attack bonus of a 15.
That and to get this level of maneuvers you would need an initiator level of a 17, which is pretty decent.
This is done for multiple classes and archetypes. Monk Flurry of Blows, Martial Artist combat maneuvers, etc. Not too overwhelming, seeing how it is only when you are doing X.
This ultimately rewards characters that stick with not multiclassing too much.
Sometimes Climax abilities should be like that. I have played epic levels and high fantasy since 3.0, and we still use them in pathfinder. Meteor Swarm = 5d6 x4 + quickened empowered scorching ray = 6d6 x 4 total damage is 44d6 which is pretty decent damage.
If you are an arcane trickster though you can apply sneak attack damage to each ray and each meteor for lots of damage. Unfortunately, you can't sudden strike every single encounter nor are you guaranteed to always get sneak attack in (Trueseeing, fortification, etc). it's not easy to get hide in plain sight without doing stuff.
Because we are talking about a maneuver that can be used every combat, this attack should be used as a literal final blow, or a one shot where you give it your all. Steel Hydra Strike, does multiple attacks and results in death. This one, if every hit strikes true and you have clustered shot (only apply DR once) and you are golden.
I also look at monstrous characters as well. :) Having a number of attacks based on an ability modifier is extremely powerful. For example, a dryad (CR 3) has a base dex of a 19. for a player, you would make that a +8 to dexterity. They pick a dex based character and put a 16 in there, to give it a 24, +6 from magical item, +5 levels = 35. That is 12 attacks in a full round action. I look at things from multiple perspectives in terms of not just base races, but boss monsters as well. The winds, just give an additional obstacle as well.
Possible new Riven Hourglass 9th.
Split the Stream
Riven Hourglass (Boost)
Level: 9
Prerequisites: Four Riven Hourglass maneuvers
Initiation Action: 1 swift action
Range: Personal
Target: You
Duration: 1 + initiation modifier roundsYou tear your time-stream in two, rending reality asunder and bringing a duplicate of yourself into the world. The duplicate is identical to you in all ways and possess all of your attributes, abilities and items (except single-use or charged items that replicated spells with an XP cost or expensive material component cost). It fights under your control as an extension of your own consciousness and on your initiative count, for as long as it continues to exist. Maneuvers, spells, or other abilities used by the duplicate are used from your available stock and if used by the duplicate are expended. If you or the duplicate are reduced to 0 hit points or below, it immediately ceases to exist.
At the end of the effect (or when the duplicate vanishes, whichever comes first) you advance one temporary age category due to the chronological strain on your own timeline, although you do not gain the mental bonuses that this would normally entail (treat this as an age category advancement that vanishes the next time you take an 8-hour rest). If you were already Venerable, you are immediately reduced to 0 hit points and become unconscious upon the duplicate vanishing.
---
I worry that this is far, far stronger and I'm looking for ways to include limitations on the duplicate. Isolating it from your spells/maneuvers may be the best way to do it, then they're just limited to your feats and other abilities. Then maybe it's too weak. A suggestion was made that instead of reducing you to 0 hp and unconsciousness it kills you as your burn out your quintessence.
Thoughts?
-X
Hmmmm... I think what I would do is this : "The duplicate is identical to you in all ways and possesses all of your attributes, abilities but only possesses non-magical versions of the original's equipment. Magical items can be given to the duplicate and after the duration expires or if it is slain, any magical items that were given to the duplicate remains as it is unable to go to the alternate timestream."
This here would be a significant change. Assuming a +5 weapon, and a +6 ability score item, you are looking at a -8 to attack and damage rolls from the original. It also makes it easier to hit, and also can decrease the amount of hit points it possesses.
At the level we are talking about, the gear isn't nearly as important as the maneuvers and how you can "chain" or interweave them.
Some major updates to Mithral Current have been implemented. Please see the Class Templates document to view these changes!
Up next: Tempest Gale, and some other stuff!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tempest Gale maneuvers have now been standardized around Sleight of Hand vs. CMD, and I've cleared up some of the wording to hopefully make it clear that the bonuses to Combat maneuvers from stances in the discipline apply to the Skill Checks.
Tempest Gale has been added to the Privateer's discipline list in place of Primal Fury and Tempest Gale has been added to the Class Templates document.
Still more updates to come barring the apocalypse.
Possible new Riven Hourglass 9th.
Split the Stream
[...]Thoughts?
-X
How does this compare to the psionic power fission (which is 7th level)?
How does this compare to the psionic power fission (which is 7th level)?Possible new Riven Hourglass 9th.
Split the Stream
[...]Thoughts?
-X
Better in just about all ways. Gear is duplicated with few exceptions, no caster level penalty imposed to limit ability usage at all, a swift action to activate and I believe aging a category comes out to -2 to the stat which ends up being -1 penalty, which is less than the sickened would give.
Actually it is -1, -2, -3 so (unless you were already middle aged) the first time you used it no penalty to checks. If you used it a second time that same day to accumulate a -3 penalty for two age jumps it would land you a -1 penalty.
|
So how would you feel about a fighter with grit and some deeds (nothing so extensive as to be compared with the gunslinger). Minor stuff, stuff a fighter -should- be able to do. I ask this because I've consulted Prince of Knives on it and he feels that its not a good plan. I look at it and it think that it "fixes" the class, but we're not necessarily here to do that. Between giving it up to 6th level maneuver access and some deeds and grit, I think to myself that fighter becomes a viable class in a game with martial initiators as well as spellcasting classes. Consider also that it trades out several of its bonus feats as opposed to stuff like weapon and armor training, so it makes itself available to many (like 90%) of the fighter archetypes out there.
Before I share a link to something, I would like some initial feedback to the pitch.
-X
If it's feasible, I'd say wait and see what the Fatigue points system from Paizo looks like in Unchained; it may not be necessary to fix the Fighter too much of they're already doing the work for you.
I'm not sure how much that system would help; it really depends on the nature of the options the pool provides him. My biggest concern would be that the Fighter can already fight, and helping the Gunslinger and Swashbuckler do that is the primary focus of their Grit/Panache pools. A pool that can be utilized to expand the Fighter's faculties in the realms of utility and magic interaction could be handy though.
The idea is that I would be adding utility and maneuver related goodies with said pool of grit. Less combat directly, more indirect combat and utility.
-X
If you were to make a fighter archetype, getting a panache pool might be cool. I am just very unsure what class feature would be traded for it when they already must lose features for maneuvers. If anything, I'd prefer an archetype that is compatible with most fighter archetypes over a grit/panache using one.
I'm also in the camp of waiting for Pathfinder Unchained or just not making a Fighter archetype......
I think a Warlord archetype that's fighterized would make way more sense than a Fighter archetype.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Tempest Gale maneuvers have now been standardized around Sleight of Hand vs. CMD, and I've cleared up some of the wording to hopefully make it clear that the bonuses to Combat maneuvers from stances in the discipline apply to the Skill Checks.
Tempest Gale has been added to the Privateer's discipline list in place of Primal Fury and Tempest Gale has been added to the Class Templates document.
Still more updates to come barring the apocalypse.
Man we were just talking about why that's a really bad idea. :/
It's a shame how integrated Skill vs Non-Skill Value is with other parts of Path of War, it doesn't mean you have to keep making the same mistake going forward. Like... look, here's timeline of check vs DC for a character that spends no more than one feat on their primary skill and no more than 5% of their WBL on boosting it (aside from Dex boosting items because obviously an archer is going to pick those up).
- Starting with 18 Dex
- Sleight of Hand is a class skill with 1 rank per level
- Skill Focus is acquired at 5th level (could be earlier as a human, especially because lots of bonus Skill Focuses), since you have an actual reason to do so now
- 20% of WBL is dedicated to a +Dex item (locked to +2 increments, a common home ruling) that the character would acquire for archery purposes anyway
- Compared to the average CMD of your level (will usually be much lower, since one-big-creature encounters are rarely ever a challenge). This also includes the high number of very large creatures with much larger than average CMDs (seriously, maximums hover around 10 points higher than average, and are harsher than PC CMDs).
- Not including inherents (because people around here seem to bristle about it, even though it's a common CRB+Bestiary 1 option), but if I did, note a +2 increase to Sleight of Hand at 11th level on (and a commensurate +10% success rate)
- Also not including stances, as they vary situationally. However note that Tempest Gale offers a stance at 1st level that adds a +2 bonus, and another +2 for every 4 initiator levels (indicating 100% success rate at every level at 4th and higher), and a 3rd level stance that applies +1/4 IL (indicating 95-100% success rate at 8th and on while active).
1st Level: +8 vs 12; 85% success
2nd Level: Acquired mwk tool, +11 vs 14; 90% success
3rd Level: Acquired +1 skill item (100 gp), +13 vs 17; 85% success
4th Level: +1 base Dex (now 19), +14 vs 18; 85% success
5th Level: Acquired Skill Focus, Upgraded to +2 item (400 gp), +19 vs 22; 90% success
6th Level: +20 vs 23; 90% success
7th Level: Acquired +2 Dex item, Upgraded to +3 item (900 gp), +23 vs 26; 90% success
8th Level: +1 base Dex (now 20), (Upgraded to +4 item (1,600 gp), +26 vs 28; 95% success
9th Level: +27 vs 31; 85% success
10th Level: Upgraded to +5 item (2,500 gp), Skill Focus upgrades to +6, +32 vs 32; 100% success
11th Level: Acquired +4 Dex item, Upgraded to +6 item (3,600 gp), +35 vs 35; 100% success
12th Level: +1 base Dex (now 21), Upgraded to +7 item (4,900 gp), +37 vs 36; 100% success
13th Level: Upgraded to +8 item (6,400 gp), +39 vs 37; 100% success
14th Level: Acquired +6 Dex item, Upgraded to +9 item (8,100 gp), +42 vs 39; 100% success
15th Level: Upgraded to +10 item (10,000 gp), +44 vs 44; 100% success
16th Level: +1 base Dex (now 22), +46 vs 45; 100% success
17th Level: +47 vs 47; 100% success
18th Level: +48 vs 49; 100% success
19th Level: +49 vs 52; 90% success
20th Level: +50 vs 55; 80% success
This is with minimal investment in combat usage. You could very well take Discipline Mastery and succeed on your checks 100% of the time always. Heck, just take Discipline Mastery instead of Skill Focus; it'll be more effective and you can have a 100% success rate from 8th level on and not bother with those icky dice.
It's bad enough to deal with this in other disciplines and needing to find alternative opposed checks that work out reasonably. Please stop this madness going forward. :(
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I cannot favorite Aratrok's posts enough. These skill checks vs non-skill checks need to die in a fire. A hot fire. Preferably dragon's fire. In hell.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Aratrok, I appreciate the math you did and you've done a good job of illustrating your point, but you've only shown the data set that best fits your argument.
You need to compare those numbers to standard character CMB vs. average CMD,then you need to compare Skill check vs. upper bound CMD (Highest CMD for creatures CR+3) to establish where it falls in a worst case scenario. And then you have to look at those other sets of numbers and compare them to the set you came up with and determine whether or not you think that characters should be able to succeed on their maneuver effects consistently considering its the main point of the discipline.
The fact is, there's a lot more going on that what you've chosen to highlight. Skill checks vs. CMD are much more likely to succeed, yes, but that's a much better alternative to not being able to use your maneuvers effectively, or at all.
Lastly, you'll notice that almost all of the Skill Check vs. CMD maneuvers are low level, and thus are likely to be traded out due to their much lower damage (dead is the best status effect you can inflict after all).
I've done my own math on this, and I think that Skill Check vs. CMD is fine, it offers a higher rate of success, but I don't consider that a bad thing on a discipline where the point of it is to control enemies through combat maneuvers and trick shots.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The biggest problem isn't being much more likely to succeed (though auto success is indeed a problem). It's that someone who invests a little bit into it will always succeed, and someone who doesn't optimize for it (IE; doesn't buy a skill enhancing item with some pocket change) will look dramatically different from a character played by someone who is aware of the problems with Pathfinder's skill system- an issue you don't run into with, say, expecting people to have magic weapons boosting their attacks.
Here are the same numbers versus upper bounds, since you asked for them. They're far from relevant in a real game, since we're talking corner case monsters from dumpster diving in the bestiary rather than anything likely to show up, and even if they do it's unlikely to be more than once. I'm using the maximum CMD of CR = Level and average CMD of CR = Level+3 since you mentioned CR = Level+3, even though fighting a single creature of CR = Level+3 is going to be a really, really badly designed encounter that's unsatisfying on both ends.
As a reminder, this is a basic model character that's only ever devoting 1 feat and 5% of their wealth to this shtick. They aren't using the plethora of other methods for boosting maneuvers and skills that are available and sticking purely to masterwork tools and +competence items. They're not using inherent bonuses, and only spending a fifth of their wealth on their primary ability score. They're not benefiting from any stances, even though they provide massive (+2 to +12) bonuses to the check, nor are they using Discipline Mastery to turn any success rate of 55% or higher into 100%. This is already a character that had every number taken as conservatively as possible, not a real character. And they're being compared against hilariously unfavorable numbers now, including the highest values from vast swathes of creatures that will never see actual play, and never against the CMDs of NPC foes (which are among the most used creatures with the lowest CMDs).
1st Level: +8 vs 18 or 18; 55% or 55% success
2nd Level: Acquired mwk tool, +11 vs 20 or 22; 60% or 50% success
3rd Level: Acquired +1 skill item (100 gp), +13 vs 22 or 23; 60% or 50% success
4th Level: +1 base Dex (now 19), +14 vs 26 or 26; 45% or 45% success
5th Level: Acquired Skill Focus, Upgraded to +2 item (400 gp), +19 vs 31 or 28; 45% or 60% success
6th Level: +20 vs 31 or 31; 50% success
7th Level: Acquired +2 Dex item, Upgraded to +3 item (900 gp), +23 vs 38 or 32; 30% or 60% success
8th Level: +1 base Dex (now 20), (Upgraded to +4 item (1,600 gp), +26 vs 34 or 35; 65% or 60% success
9th Level: +27 vs 43 or 36; 25% or 60% success
10th Level: Upgraded to +5 item (2,500 gp), Skill Focus upgrades to +6, +32 vs 40 or 37; 65% or 80% success
11th Level: Acquired +4 Dex item, Upgraded to +6 item (3,600 gp), +35 vs 49 or 39; 35% or 85% success
12th Level: +1 base Dex (now 21), Upgraded to +7 item (4,900 gp), +37 vs 45 or 44; 65% or 70% success
13th Level: Upgraded to +8 item (6,400 gp), +39 vs 47 or 45; 65% or 75% success
14th Level: Acquired +6 Dex item, Upgraded to +9 item (8,100 gp), +42 vs 49 or 47; 70% or 80% success
15th Level: Upgraded to +10 item (10,000 gp), +44 vs 68 (see what I mean?) or 49; 0% or 80% success
16th Level: +1 base Dex (now 22), +46 vs 57 or 52; 50% or 75% success
17th Level: +47 vs 57 or 55; 55% or 65% success
18th Level: +48 vs 57 or 60; 60% or 45% success
19th Level: +49 vs 66 or 63; 20% or 35% success
20th Level: +50 vs 64 or 52; 35% or 95% success
Seriously, reconsider what you're doing here. I'd recommend going back and stripping skill check maneuvers from old disciplines too, but I know that's kinda unreasonable and as much as I don't like it I can fix those myself.
PS: Fun fact for those numbers up there? With slightly more investment (using a 1st level Tempest Gale stance, grabbing a +1 bonus from somewhere, and Discipline Mastery) there's no level past 8 where you couldn't have a 100% success rate. Before that, there's only one point where you dip below a 60% success rate in these worst cases, and with only the stance levels 1-7 average a 67% success rate.
PPS: It gets way worse with maneuvers that make a skill check against AC, an attack roll, or a save DC. It inflates out of control crazy fast (a 6th level PC can be saving against CR 18-20 threats a good 50-60% of the time, and auto succeeding at anything relevant as early as 7th level).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I appreciate you taking the time to do still more math, but again its a question of how this compares to the current system and whether or not you feel that players should be more likely to succeed at things they invest character resources in, or fail at them.
That's what it really comes down to for me, is whether or not players deserve to be powerful and versatile or not. Look at the enchantment school of magic, there are some truly amazing effects in there, but they all have the mind affecting tag and there are bonuses to resist their effects all over the place, which makes investing in the Enchantment school a very shaky prospect.
I don't like that. That shouldn't be a thing Players have to deal with. Its fine to throw the occasional [mind-affecting] immune enemy into the fray to throw your enchanter for a loop, but there's no reason 45% (I'm guesstimating) of the bestiary should be immune to your schtick.
Skill check maneuvers offer a good chance of auto success on something you're investing permanent (or near permanent) resources into and I'm OK with that. A skill check counter lets you pass a save, but how many of those are you going to have readied at a time? As a DM you can build around those effects if you want to pretty easily. Use multiple saves, use multiple enemies, use flying enemies to avoid being tripped or Oozes and centipedes galore, and when your player burns their auto-win counter on a breath weapon, then hit them with a Hold Person, because you know they don't have a second auto-win button readied.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The example used only used 5% of wbl and one feat.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I support the skill check maneuvers. It's something you're going to be able to do once, twice tops, in a fight. You should be able to do it consistently since you're spending 5% of your WBL a feat (or more) and full ranks on sleight of hand.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am flabbergasted that you don't see a problem with powerful abilities that have no chance of failure with only a very tiny investment in them (seriously, skillpoints are not expensive; especially since most skills fall out of usefulness entirely as time goes on and spellcasters and special abilities obviate their existence). And skill vs CMD is probably one of the closest to functional, since CMD scales up so fast. Consistent success isn't a problem- it's something every player wants- it's constant success.
Once again, the biggest issues here aren't just the auto-success (though once again, it's a problem because it makes the abilities binary and in many cases overpowered compared to level appropriate options)- it's that you're tying the functionality of an ability to something dissociated with character level; two characters of the same level can have wildly different skill modifiers depending on how conscious they are of the flaws with the skill system. One person with a +10 item has a % chance of success 50 points higher than someone who doesn't, and it's not a blindingly obvious choice in the same way that getting a magic sword is.
Like... honestly it feels like you're just continuing to throw your weight behind this because you already did it and don't want to admit you made a mistake. Matching the skill system up against other parts of the system is indefensible in its current state. And basing an ability on skill checks on its own was one of the fatal flaws with Truename magic from 3.5.
Also this?
and when your player burns their auto-win counter on a breath weapon, then hit them with a Hold Person, because you know they don't have a second auto-win button readied.
That's metagaming. Don't do that.
EDIT: Though, probably one of the biggest problems in Tempest Gale itself is Trick of the Wind combined with full attacks or, god help us, Vicious Tempest Volley, a combination that will reliably reduce any target to ash in one round. But the problem with using skill checks as part of maneuvers is endemic in other places as well.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Aratrok, we're running some numbers of our own as well. I assure you we're considering this very careful within the entire design team to see if this is something that we need alter or if it's something that falls within the limits we feel make sense and aren't unbalancing to the entire game as a whole. I don't have an immediate answer, but one is forthcoming. I do appreciate your zeal in this matter because I see you obviously feel very strongly on the matter - this shows me the investiture you have in this project and your desire to see it not be a doomed outing. I try to be more conservative then some of my fellows for just this reason, to not unbalance things but we all make these things that sounds cool but maybe don't work in execution. If we can prove it doesn't, then we'll revisit other disciplines as well that are utilizing this mechanic and decide on how those are to be used. If Skills used offensively proves to be too strong, we still may retain Skills used defensively. We'll figure out the best solution we can.
-X
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with Aratrok 100%. Even with the 3.5 Tome of Battle, I ended up ultimately nerfing and/or revising all of the skill vs non-skill checks because it's effortlessly easy to push into the "always succeed" territory.
I personally have some problems with this as well:
Skill check maneuvers offer a good chance of auto success on something you're investing permanent (or near permanent) resources into and I'm OK with that. A skill check counter lets you pass a save, but how many of those are you going to have readied at a time? As a DM you can build around those effects if you want to pretty easily. Use multiple saves, use multiple enemies, use flying enemies to avoid being tripped or Oozes and centipedes galore, and when your player burns their auto-win counter on a breath weapon, then hit them with a Hold Person, because you know they don't have a second auto-win button readied.
Just pointing this out but you don't even have to invest permanent resources into it. Merely having a +2 headband keyed to the associated skill means you can reset your investment every 24 hours so you don't even need to invest real skill points into it.
And 5% of WBL is not a significant and permanent investment. It's actually less than you're expected to expend in consumables in a given level (about 15%).
If you want an auto-succeed on a save, just do it. It's more honest. Honestly, I'd rather stuff that let you re-roll saves with a bonus or something (kind of like the barbarian's eater of magic). Don't make it sloppy like this. But this skill check vs save DCs, ACs, etc? It's just nasty.
Just for ease of integration for people who want to do it slowly I think the idea of a fighter archetype is a good idea.
Piercing Thunder is back open for beta and updated in the class documents.
It's going to have some grammar edits and so forth likely, but otherwise, consider it ready for play. It has been refocused to remove the horse but still keep it a spear-fighter's discipline. Nothing stops you from maneuvering on horseback with anything, but Thunder at least has discipline weapons that support the style and its maneuvers still have relevance in that department.
-X
I'm late to the party but; I agree that Skill Check verses non Skill Check is generally bad because Skills can be pumped way too easily for that. That said I haven't noticed it attached to anything terribly powerful so I see those maneuvers as 'You can autosucceed in this manuever at the price of commitment to a skill check.' If its nothing special then it isn't that terrible of a problem but if we want to be safe side going into Path of War Expanded I'd much rather avoid the issue entirely than flirt with the danger zone.
Personally, I feel that skill checks on counters are okay, as long as it remains strictly defensive (the ones with counterattacks that depend on attack rolls are also okay). For the most part, if I spend an immediate action on a counter I do expect it to have a reasonably good chance of succeeding (and certainly much better than just BAB + Shield Bonus like the early-game iron tortoise ones). Otherwise, that action would be better utilized on a boost that gives defenses - say, the level 2 Golden Lion boost that gave +AC instead.
However, skill checks start becoming really problematic when you start replacing things like ATTACK ROLLS with it. Most people already know the Zenith Strikes to be an auto-hit at mid-high levels due to how easy it is to pump Sense Motive into the stratosphere. A +10 Sense Motive item is only 10,000 GP and provides a +50% extra hit chance. You even have a feat that lets you take 10 on this! With a modest investment in WBL I can pump Sense Motive so high that I can activate Dazing Assault, Stunning Assault, and Power Attack simultaneously and have it still hit for 4x damage without trouble (assuming the penalties actually apply in the first place, since RAW can go either way).
I mean, if Tempest Wind was all about skill checks to counters, then that would be awesome. Bringing skill checks into CMB territory is an entirely different ballgame, and I think that even the whole "bringing martials up to casters" paradigm needs at least some leashes to it. You won't give a barbarian a +10000 to hit/damage and call it balanced just because it would still be Tier 4, after all.
This is the reason why the final version of Path of War lost all of its "Save and Lose Anyway" maneuvers, IIRC.
Skill checks on defensive counters are definitely less of a problem. They still leap into auto-succeed territory really quickly though, which makes me wonder why not just have the counter auto-succeed or something instead; the mechanic is less obfuscated and functionality is clearer to more players.
Skill checks on defensive counters are definitely less of a problem. They still leap into auto-succeed territory really quickly though, which makes me wonder why not just have the counter auto-succeed or something instead; the mechanic is less obfuscated and functionality is clearer to more players.
I think it's more for balance at lower levels. For your examples, you've invested pretty heavily into DEX, and still come up a bit short of 80+% at level 1-6. A lot of counters depend on stats like WIS and CHA, which not every character can boost as easily. Even if you include traits like Clever Wordplay, the limit of 1 social trait per character will then mean that you then can't take Bruising Intellect for a Cornugon Smash/Guard's Glare lock-down combo for an early game.
From personal experience, right now my Zweihander Warder is at level 4 with +10 in Sense Motive and +13 in Diplomacy; this is with Focused Study in Sense Motive, since without the feat my Sense Motive score (due to not being able to invest points into WIS) would actually be lower than my normal attack bonus.
Right now, I still miss occasionally with Rising Zenith Strike and rolled poorly (failed) on Warning Roar at least four times. This is with decent, but not focused, investment in Diplomacy and with me sacrificing a full combat feat for Focused Study (which is a significant investment at level 4). Thus, at low levels before you can get that first +skills item, the skill checks are still capable of failing - balancing how powerful counters are at this level.
Once the +skill item starts coming into play, enemies will also start having multiple attacks, quickened spells, and other stuff, making counters less powerful for their relative auto-succeed status.
(Also, note that there isn't a MW tool for everything, and by Paizo's own guidelines, they shouldn't grant bonuses to every use of that skill without other limits. My DM would hit me over the head with a newspaper if I tried to suggest that an absolutely awe-inspiring engraving on my plate armor would gave me a +2 Diplomacy for the sake of counters).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even at higher levels, I think most skill checks would need significant investment to reach auto-success levels as long as you ban +skill items that give more than a +5 bonus. Especially if the skill is based on a dump stat (such as Wis for a Warlord).
It is not like custom crafted +10 and +15 items did anything for the skill system except making it more broken anyway.
Outright banning legitimate core items from a game just so it works nicely with 3pp material probably isn't the greatest argument... Just saying. PoW is going to be fighting an uphill battle for "acceptance" as it is, outside the group of avid fans that exists. Keeping the possible "abuses" from being published as finished product is in their best interest.
"legitimate core items" seems far fetched, seeing as the only +10skill core items seems to be about perception, or the occasional circumastantial items (like acrobatics only for jumping, bluff only for lying and etc)
DSP's other product, Psionics, does have +10 skill items in Crystal Masks.
Also, the specific skill being discussed here is Sleight of Hand, which Paizo officially has a +8 item for (Prestidigitator's Cloak). It does cost a bit more than a standard +8 item, though still a small investment for any decent-leveled adventurer.
"legitimate core items" seems far fetched, seeing as the only +10skill core items seems to be about perception, or the occasional circumastantial items (like acrobatics only for jumping, bluff only for lying and etc)
I have not been keeping up with the proposed rules or this discussion particularly closely, but there are a number of +10 and +15 skill items since at least 3.0. I don't know if the skills involved there have anything to do with the discussion (see comment about not keeping up earlier), but I wouldn't dismiss such bonuses as being far-fetched or non-core.
From what I can tell, it does sound like there is a lot of potential for abuse if it's not handled well and I'm glad that folks are discussing it so much to make the best system possible. Kudos to everyone participating in the conversation.
Paizo has items that grant +15 skill bonuses, official material, not custom items. Off the top of my head there is Stealth and Escape Artist "add on" armor abilities that go +5/10/15. They run a bit over 30k gp for the top end ones, so not terribly expensive either.
If combat "skill checks" are going to be a "thing" in PoW, they should probably be shifted up a tier or two from what the developers have now. The games PoW are going to be in are home games, not PFS. This often means a more relaxed and less strict adherence to rules and absolutely does increase the likelihood of custom items. Not every GM is going to be able to screen and scale all things as needed, and it is significantly easier to scale something up in power than it is to scale down. Not to mention the sour taste that it leaves when an book ends up seeming OP or broken due to some small thing like auto successes in combat because of skills being brought into play (and swift action recovery mechanics).
Any time a 3pp suggests a possible rules variant that could be pushed to the limits like that, I would always suggest erring on the side of caution. If something gets called broke, people will will be significantly more critical of everything made even if the rest of it is solid. Seriously, just look at psionics.... And the bum rap they still get. Tone it down for publishing, and put a side bar saying, "we used these assumptions for design purposes, if you don't allow +15 skill items do xyz to bring it back in line with things as intended." Cover your bases.
There are ways to get +15 to skill checks in the game, items that don't take up a slot and are cheap. When designing the rules for using skill checks in combat, the PoW designers had better figure that into the equation, because something like that will get used. Whatever numbers they are throwing around should have that +15 included as part of the figuring. It is cheap and effective, and an absolute must have for any character that would make use of those manuevers.
Suggesting banning skill items because it might end up broken in regards to a 3pp publication is just... So backwards it is silly, in an unamusing way.
|
|
Any time a 3pp suggests a possible rules variant that could be pushed to the limits like that, I would always suggest erring on the side of caution. If something gets called broke, people will will be significantly more critical of everything made even if the rest of it is solid. Seriously, just look at psionics.... And the bum rap they still get. Tone it down for publishing, and put a side bar saying, "we used these assumptions for design purposes, if you don't allow +15 skill items do xyz to bring it back in line with things as intended." Cover your bases.
Wanted to emphasize this one a bit.... Getting a rep for being "OP", deserved or not, can have a seriously negative impact. I'd be an adv ocate for abilities that are more along the lines of "make skill check X vs. DC Y for Z effect", removing the system where you've got two things that scale very differently being compared to each other. Instead, you create an adjacent subsystem where the interactions can be much more tightly monitored and controlled without adding a bunch of complexity.
For example, a counter that's "make a [Sleight of Hand] check against your opponent's [Perception]; if successful, gain [cover/concealment/+X to AC] against this attack". It's no more complicated than a feint check, but you've isolated the opposed rolls into the same subsystem and created a predictable effect.
Most feedback about too much damage was about mounted charges and maneuvers stacking........
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Killing an enemy with a 9th level ability is fine. Killing almost anything with a 95% success rate (or 100%- see Tempest Gale's 9th level maneuver, hoo boy) isn't, no matter who's doing it. It's not fun to play or play against.
I'm fine with abilities that have a high rate of success and are powerful and useful. That's not the complaint happening here. The issue is tying things to skill checks, which was a noted mechanical flaw in the original Tome of Battle and with Truenaming.
Like I said, I've got no problem with a counter that's just something like "You succeed on a Reflex save". I think that's mechanically clearer and better designed than "You make an acrobatics check in place of a Reflex save".