|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I concur, now that it is clear and no shenanigans on the definition of a "punch" can be abused, it should be made legal.
On a side related Monk question, why was Hamtulatsu made illegal, yet the Hamatulatsu Master archetype is still legal? Was there some ability that replaced it or some other reason it is off the list?
|
|
Hamatulatsu Master doesn't actually get its namesake feat, they have to take it as a normal feat or a bonus one, so no actual adjustment was needed to keep it legal.I concur, now that it is clear and no shenanigans on the definition of a "punch" can be abused, it should be made legal.
On a side related Monk question, why was Hamtulatsu made illegal, yet the Hamatulatsu Master archetype is still legal? Was there some ability that replaced it or some other reason it is off the list?
Which doesn't answer the first question of why it was now removed.
And the Archetype does add the feat to it's bonus feat list as well as, you know, being thematically and lore wise based on a monastic school of study that is centered around the Hamatulatsu art. While the feat is not required, it is pretty specific to it.
|
|
You're right, my bad... I have the Year of the Demon version I looked at for comparison (since the Feats line from ISWG is in red now due to changes), and I saw Fortune Teller and Harrowed and skipped right over Hamatulatsu, then seeing it listed in Red print now with those two no longer bracketing it, my brain registered it as something new.
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
The only monks I have built/used of late have been Zen Archers, so I never really paid it much heed.
Though I am curious as to why exactly it isn't legal, especially with how it fits with the Archetype!
|
|
I hope we can get Mike Brock to comment on why it was removed. I think most people feel it's a fine feat now with the errata/FAQ.
Otherwise my only tiefling has a date with the jump off a cliff express.
It was removed before the FAQ was released, at least sometime earlier this week was when I saw it.
They pretty much did the exact fix that I think is good and balanced, which is why I created this thread, because now its no longer filled with the "any weapon" shenanigans, which I believe is why its now banned as it was originally legal. Also, I do have a PC this affects, which I'll probably never play if he can't use Pummeling charge (Which I was using RAI anyway). Of course, I have like 15 PC's or something so loosing one isn't the worst thing that could happen for me, but I know for some other players its a big deal.
Plus poor tieflings shouldn't have to jump off cliffs.
|
I've no intention of remaking or retraining him he's unplayable without the feat.
I hate when people say things like this. Your lack of imagination is no one's fault but your own. You should be able to make something viable given the retraining rules already in place. It's one feat, that didn't even exist earlier this year.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If people are saying characters are unplayable without this feat, that's a great argument for why it should be banned.
It's too good.
|
|
I guess it's all about how you look at things. If they said Power Attack was banned, I'd still play my Two-handed Barbarian. I wouldn't whinge on the boards that he was unplayable without one feat out of the 5 he has. Of course, my Barbarian is probably the only one in the Society that doesn't have pounce, and he's still a viable character. So again: It's all about perspective.
|
|
If people are saying characters are unplayable without this feat, that's a great argument for why it should be banned.
It's too good.
Considering my level 2 SF1/MoMS 1 has 4 EXP and 6 PP it's literally unplayable as it stands. He basically loses a level for multiple levels even if I retrain it then I have to retrain pummeling style and his ability scores are pretty terrible for anything but the pummeling build.
Thankfully, despite the naysayers, we have retraining now!
You can fix almost any and all build snafus with a bit of gold and some prestige.Unfortunately most lower characters don't have enough PP to fix half of the problems with the character.
Post the build in the Advice thread. Fresh sets of eyes may help you find a fix.
Basing entire builds around questionable or grey rules interpretations is always a bad idea.
It is just begging for your character to be made 'unplayable'.
I say this as a massive power gamer. Just don't do it.
Or at least have the grace not to whinge about it or expect any sympathy later on if your build is invalidated by subsequent rulings
There's tons of other builds out there. Worst case scenario, shelve the character, move on, and chalk it up to a learning experience.
-j
I dunno. I saw the banning coming a mile away and therefore deliberately did not mess with the feat despite having two characters that legitimately could have benefited. I am expecting (hoping) possibly it might get un-banned now that it has errata.
I pretty much have the same expectations of ANY feat or option with broken mechanics. Since PFS generally does not change the rules, anything that might be broken is going to be banned, at least until it's been FAQed/errata'd.
Maybe it's just me, but it seems pretty obvious. Had the same fulfilled predictions on Crane Wing and that runner shirt.
-j
|
|
You still have your Falcon Punch/Kick, just not on a charge. You still have the melee equivalent of Clustered Shots far earlier than any archer or gunslinger. If you consider that unplayable, I really hate to be there the first time you don't get both prestige from a mission, or actually fail one. Or have a character die. Or suffer any one of a dozen more serious setbacks.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you misunderstand. The feat literally fixes the entire stand still vs mobility or suck issue for a monk. The monk is literally stand still and forget the fact that your basically made to be mobile (speed boosts + 4+ skill points with almost all your skills being physical) or move and suck terribly. Something that actually address both of those issues is badly needed (please see multiple monks suck threads on the boards). The fact that it clusters everything is nice too, but hardly coming upon over powered IMO, especially as unarmed strike has a really hard time overcoming DR (unlike archery).
Now I do admit with weapons it was too strong, but allowing a class to fix multiple of its inherent design flaws is not too powerful, its fixing an issue that should've been solved years ago, IMO.
|
|
Never said anything about it being too powerful. Never said it wasn't just what monks needed. It is. I said not having it doesn't make a character "unplayable." Then it was said the concept made it "unplayable" and again I showed that wasn't the case. Now, we're to the point that it is just as playable as every monk ever since the beginning of Pathfinder.
I wouldn't worry too much about it. Now that there is errata, it's likely to be reviewed. Unarmed monks will be back in the spotlight, and the people who were abusing the wording of the feat will still have playable characters, too.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I posted this same thing in another thread, but this is a far more appropriate one in which to have this conversation than the AR page. I will go back and delete that one in a moment.
Banning monk of many styles is not something I think needs to be done but unlike this banning I'd understand it.
Just want to point out Sacred fist/brawler + MoMS get's pounce at level 2.
The summoner's mount get's pounce at level 1.
Druid's get it at 6.
Barbarians get it at 10.Can anyone actually justify pummeling charge being banned while a 1 point evolution gives pounce?
Anyone?
I'll wait.
That said if something was to be banned here. Monk of many styles actually makes a lot of sense. Cheating prerequisites should be literally assumed when creating the feats (Think stunning fist) or should never happen at all.
While I am generally inclined to agree with you in that I also prefer to see as few options banned as reasonably possible, I feel that in a lot of ways we are addressing the problematic style feat symptoms (ban for pummeling charge, awful errata for crane wing), but not the cause of those symptoms (master of many styles archetype, unarmed fighter archetype, ect. skipping level prerequisites). Feats have a minimum level for a reason, which is usually because their effect is considered too strong until the designated levels in which adversaries and can be expected to have similar abilities and/or appropriate answers.
Past that, pretty much all melee focused classes really need some sort of gift horse with which to allow them to have some manner of mobility with multiple attacks. Such a thing would go a long way towards addressing the combat portion of imbalance between melee, ranged, and spells.
Developer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm open to discussing this feat, it's recently revised wording, and the above's impact on the feat's future in Pathfinder Society Organized Play. However, I must recognize that as a human being, there are certain types of emotional appeal that tend to have little impact on me; in fact, they can have the opposite of the intended effect for me. In the interest of promoting sound debate and providing you the fairest consideration of your platform, I ask that you refrain from melodramatic hyperbole, threats of character suicide, and the increasingly common "Paizo hates [monks/fighters/martials]" rhetoric.
Sound reasonable?
That sounds like grounds for banning master of many styles and leaving pummeling charge alone.
…
What about snake fang and fortuitous weapons? We're going to have like 10-15 style feats changed/errated because of MoMS which is a good indication that Pummeling charge which is significantly worse than greater beast totem since you can't pummeling with a lance, nodachi, or falcata (after errata) there's no valid justification for it being banned.The above justification "It can be cheated early" Is a good justification to ban what cheats it. Not what is being cheated. After all I highly doubt that in practical PFS games spell perfection is a problem. I think if you could get it at level 2 it would be slightly more of a problem. Just saying.
I'm borrowing this from the Additional Resources page thread, as this is the better place to have the discussion. It's an interesting point that seems to mesh fairly well with the contents of this thread. It's also just different enough from the posts about Pummeling Charge that I am addressing it on a broader scale—not just in terms of that feat.
Let's consider the ramifications of this move. The Pathfinder Society approach would be to ban the archetype, for Mike and I rarely make rules exceptions and modifications for character options unless the option attempts to integrate with a feature that is already banned (e.g. replacing a wizard's Scribe Scroll feat with Spell Focus because of the ban on item-crafting). At this point, the master of many styles archetype has been out in the wild for more than three years, and based on my experience and what I read on the messageboards, it (and its means of ignoring prerequisites) has become a key component of many monk characters—including those who have multi-classed into monk largely or entirely for that purpose. Is it better for the campaign to ban the archetype, thereby seriously impacting many characters (including those who used the archetype "correctly**"), or is it better to just ban a few feats as they are published because they integrate with the archetype in what is perceived as a particularly dangerous way? What do I tell a thousand players when I ruin their character concepts so as to enable the character concepts of somebody else?
In brief, when is it better to disrupt many in the interest of implementing positive change to the system?
** In many debates about the disruptiveness/brokenness of a character option, there is the underlying assumption that there are innocent, "correct" ways to use the option as well as "broken," exploitative ways to do so. Those same debates tend to defend those who would use the option in the former way while being less forgiving of those who do so through the latter method. I'm just borrowing from this recurring theme to better explain my point without intending to cast judgment on whether the Pummeling Style chain has a good or bad use or where we are to draw that line.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As someone who has a character making use of the MoMS dip (Investigator with MoMS 2 to get Kirin Strike), I'd be comfortable with the banning of the MoMS archetype, but would hope it would come with allowance for a limited rebuild.
Something like a free retrain out of the Monk levels, including any dependent feats, but not a full character rebuild.
But I also recognize that this would damage a lot of builds a lot more seriously than mine. And I've seen firsthand the anger and frustration that ensues whenever something is banned or changed. More-so the longer that option's been available.
What I'd personally prefer to see is some modification to the MoMS archetype from the PFRPG side of things to make the archetype less dippable. Not sure what that would look like off the top of my head.
|
|
I'm going to put in that Pounce is slightly overrated in PFS. Most of the options to get Pounce aren't available for half of your normal career, and almost every single PFS game that has a combat in it has a fight or 3 in which it is plausible that an object will be in your way, the real threat has a meat shield or two in the way, there will be difficult terrain(+other optional effects), or charging in will wind up being tactically foolish. Its an amazing ability when it works, but IMO, getting it at level 2 or at level 20 doesn't make it as powerful as some of the boards claim.
The character traits, feats, and class LEVEL selections are based on the feat. His intended feat progression as well. The entire point of the build is to use pummeling style and pummeling charge with other feats such as dragon style and HotC.
Just curious, is the combination of getting 1.5*Strength on each unarmed strike you make in a round, getting your chances to score a critical threat with all successful attacks when you can get a full attack, only ever needing to confirm one critical hit/full attack, and getting that confirmation at your highest attack roll, and finally getting to laugh in DR's face as you beat it to death really unplayable now that you can't get it on a Horn of The Criosphinx Charge?
|
|
What's the justification for the inconsistency between the pounce evolution, Druid pounce, and beast totem?
Not claiming any idea on the philosophy behind what's allowed and what's not, but for those specifically...
Druid pounce is limited to hours/day and times/day. Beast totem is limited by rage. The eidolon is subject to the limitations and vulnerabilities of summoned creatures (banish, dismissal, control summoned creature, etc.). I believe the pounce evolution is very arguably underpriced, but I don't have enough familiarity with the Summoner to speak too intelligently on that subject.
Pummeling charge on the other hand is always on, and in combination with the crit-fishing aspect of Pummeling Style, additional Styles (like Dragon) and rider feats like Horn of the Criosphinx it could be powerful in ways we haven't yet imagined. Especially if it can be had as early as level 2.
I'll also echo EvilPaladin in that Pounce isn't all it's cracked up to be. Jumping into BBEG full attacks at -2 AC is often an inferior option to a readied attack on their charge (with a -2 AC penalty) and then trading full attacks (with that penalty applying to your first full attack).
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I personally am torn on the issue of banning MoMS. On the one hand, I prefer to see as little as possible banned for the simple purposes of maximum possible variety of build possibilities. On the other hand, if the options turn out to be to either ban certain styles or ban MoMS, I would prefer the MoMS ban. To further complicate this matter, as John said, it would impact countless players and their builds.
That said, let's take a quick moment to outline various pounce-like options available to martials currently, and compare.
Barbarian 10: Comes online at 10th level. Allows for 2 attacks via BAB, or as many as four using two-weapon fighting feats.
Non-MoMS monk 8: Comes online at 9th level, as you do not gain a feat or bonus feat at 9th level. Allows for 4 attacks if your archetype retains flurry, 2 otherwise.
MoMS 1: Comes online as early as 1st level. As MoMS replaces flurry however, you are looking at 1 attack through level 7, and 2 attacks at 8th and higher. Two-Weapon fighting feats double those numbers, respectively.
Mobile Fighter 11: Comes online at 11th level. Requires sacrificing your 1st attack, leaving you with 2 attacks, or as many as 5 with Two-Weapon fighting feats at that level.
Unarmed Fighter 1: Comes online as early as 1st level. Allows for 1 attack through level 5, 2 at 6th through 10th level, and 3 at 11th level. Up to double this number in the case of Two-Weapon fighting feats. Each attack deals 1d3 damage before modifiers, as unarmed fighters do not gain any monk unarmed damage progression.
With the clearing up of the language on requiring unarmed strikes, even in the earliest level case of MoMS, I don't see it being that much of an issue. The "worse case" abuse of it would be on a sacred fist with a level or two dip of MoMS, but there are so many class combinations that can lead to incredibly strong combos that I personally do not feel that this particular one requires action. Simply to provide another PFS legal example, a halfling fighter (aldori swordlord) 7 / aldori swordlord 1 / duelist 3 / monk (master of many styles) 1 fighting defensively would get a +8 dodge bonus to AC with 0 attack penalty just from feats and class features.
-4 / +2, base
-4 / +3, ranks of acrobatics
-2 / +4, crane style
-0 / +6, steel net class feature
-0 / +8, cautious fighter feat
That is also pretty ludicrous, and is only one of dozens of examples of strong multiclassing. I personally consider the amazing variety of character builds to be one of this game's strongest features, however, and believe that variety should be embraced rather than shunned, except in the worse case scenarios.
|
|
Druid pounce is limited to hours/day and times/day. Beast totem is limited by rage. The eidolon is subject to the limitations and vulnerabilities of summoned creatures (banish, dismissal, control summoned creature, etc.). I believe the pounce evolution is very arguably underpriced, but I don't have enough familiarity with the Summoner to speak too intelligently on that subject.
A valid point, but I would like to counter with another.
When is the last time you ran out of rage rounds or multiple use hours per day effects in a PFS scenario after very low level? In my PFS career, across a pair of 19th level PCs, one 16th, two 12ths, and several 1s and 2s, I have only witnessed this occur in what I would categorize as "highly uncommon" circumstances.
Food for thought.
|
|
Druid pounce is limited to hours/day and times/day. Beast totem is limited by rage. The eidolon is subject to the limitations and vulnerabilities of summoned creatures (banish, dismissal, control summoned creature, etc.). I believe the pounce evolution is very arguably underpriced, but I don't have enough familiarity with the Summoner to speak too intelligently on that subject.A valid point, but I would like to counter with another.
When is the last time you ran out of rage rounds or multiple use hours per day effects in a PFS scenario after very low level? In my PFS career, across a pair of 19th level PCs, one 16th, two 12ths, and several 1s and 2s, I have only witnessed this occur in what I would categorize as "highly uncommon" circumstances.
Food for thought.
Oh, I agree. They're not often meaningful limitations, though they can be depending on the nature of the scenario or module.
ETA:
I have encountered Druids that would rather contribute nothing to a party outside of combat in order to stay in animal form. And Barbarians (and their Pounce) can be shut down by calm emotions and fatigue.
|
|
I'm going to put in that Pounce is slightly overrated in PFS. Most of the options to get Pounce aren't available for half of your normal career, and almost every single PFS game that has a combat in it has a fight or 3 in which it is plausible that an object will be in your way, the real threat has a meat shield or two in the way, there will be difficult terrain(+other optional effects), or charging in will wind up being tactically foolish. Its an amazing ability when it works, but IMO, getting it at level 2 or at level 20 doesn't make it as powerful as some of the boards claim.I'm saying this from experience as a druid. Having pounce is the difference between being able to do damage and being better off delaying until they charge you. If they have claw claw bite W/O pounce approaching them is stupid. You're better off waiting until they come to you at that point which is hardly what I had thought the character would want to do.
Just curious as to how many rounds you think combat actually lasts. You can't fuse styles until higher levels until turn 2 which can often leave you with a rocket tag issue. If they don't want to approach you without pounce you effectively lose a turn of attacks due to 3/4ths bab and no...The character traits, feats, and class LEVEL selections are based on the feat. His intended feat progression as well. The entire point of the build is to use pummeling style and pummeling charge with other feats such as dragon style and HotC.Just curious, is the combination of getting 1.5*Strength on each unarmed strike you make in a round, getting your chances to score a critical threat with all successful attacks when you can get a full attack, only ever needing to confirm one critical hit/full attack, and getting that confirmation at your highest attack roll, and finally getting to laugh in DR's face as you beat it to death really unplayable now that you can't get it on a Horn of The Criosphinx Charge?
I have seen characters with pounce be devastating when they get their charges in, and then be decent for the rest of the adventure, because they could only get 1 or 2 of those charges in, and then stood still and full-attacked the rest of the fight. Again, its an incredibly strong ability, but it comes with a plethora of abilities that can completely shut it down(Obscuring Mist Cloud spells, Entangle, Black Tentacles, Pit spells, Wall spells, walls in general, cramped quarters, difficult terrain, intelligently-used reach-weapons, tactical placement of mooks, etc). I realize not all of these are options in PFS, but a good number of them(especially Cramped Spaces and various spells) are in a lot of PFS games I've played in/ran. I also see combats that have lasted anywhere between 2 and 12 rounds in PFS, at low and at high levels.
I suppose Your Mileage May Vary.
|
|
Given the nerf to pummeling charge I don't think it would be game breaking to include it in the game even with MoMS.
Pummeling Charge's damage output is limited by two pretty big factors.
The first is that it now requires the use of unarmed strikes, and even though you can make it so all your hits crit if one of them unarmed strikes are still only a times 2. Many builds that use 15-20 weapons crit effectivly every hit for times 2 as well.
The second way Pummeling Charge's damage is limited is in the number of attacks produced. Lets assume a worst case scenario and a person dips into MoMS or Unarmed Fighter to get the feat early. At best this means they can get two attacks on a charge as opposed to one. So at the low levels we are worried about they get an extra attack once a fight and only if they themselves are not charged. As the character progresses in level they will eventually pick up two more attacks (level 6 or 7), but then they are also at the point where NPC's will be better equipped to wheather the damage and do some punishment in return.
|
|
Given the nerf to pummeling charge I don't think it would be game breaking to include it in the game even with MoMS.
Pummeling Charge's damage output is limited by two pretty big factors.
The first is that it now requires the use of unarmed strikes, and even though you can make it so all your hits crit if one of them unarmed strikes are still only a times 2. Many builds that use 15-20 weapons crit effectivly every hit for times 2 as well.
The second way Pummeling Charge's damage is limited is in the number of attacks produced. Lets assume a worst case scenario and a person dips into MoMS or Unarmed Fighter to get the feat early. At best this means they can get two attacks on a charge as opposed to one. So at the low levels we are worried about they get an extra attack once a fight and only if they themselves are not charged. As the character progresses in level they will eventually pick up two more attacks (level 6 or 7), but then they are also at the point where NPC's will be better equipped to wheather the damage and do some punishment in return.
I created a Brawler (mutagentic mauler) / Bloodrager 2nd level character. When raging and mutagen enhanced I get two claw attacks for 1d6+7.
If I dipped MoMS at 3rd level and took Pummeling Charge, I could do 4d6 +28 damage on a crit.
Does that sound like the damage a 3rd level character should be doing?
And this isn't even super optimized. I am only starting at a 16 Strength. How gross would this be if I started with a 20 Strength? And had Power Attack? And then at 4th level dipped Cleric of Gozreh with the Growth Subdomain and upped the claws to 1d8 +14 or 4d8+56 on a Crit.
This can snowball pretty badly if you make choices simply for damage output instead of just making a character that's decent at what he does.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I created a Brawler (mutagentic mauler) / Bloodrager 2nd level character. When raging and mutagen enhanced I get two claw attacks for 1d6+7.
If I dipped MoMS at 3rd level and took Pummeling Charge, I could do 4d6 +28 damage on a crit.
Does that sound like the damage a 3rd level character should be doing?
14 Str, power attacking greatsword paladin, critting on smite at 3rd level. 4d6+18 and I'm not trying very hard. Let's make it a greataxe; 3d12+18 instead. Go for a Strength build; 16's easy to do, 18 if you're willing to dump Int and/or Wis. It's very easy to get in that ballpark if you're talking about crit damage; we didn't even go into scythes.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the choice is between banning MoMS from PFS or officially nerfing every new style feat that comes out, then my vote is for the MoMS ban. PFS should not impact people playing at home trying to follow the rules.