Could someone explain Fuse Stance to me please?

[Iron_Matt17]

Level 20 Monk feat.
It seems to be simple enough, but on further reflection it seems to get more confusing. Which stances can I fuse? And which can't I? (furthermore why can't Ironblood and Crane fuse? What does "using one type of strike." mean?

[lordcirth]

Iron_Matt17 wrote:

Level 20 Monk feat.

It seems to be simple enough, but on further reflection it seems to get more confusing. Which stances can I fuse? And which can't I? (furthermore why can't Ironblood and Crane fuse? What does "using one type of strike." mean?

You cannot fuse two stances which have mutually contradictory requirements. The example with Ironblood and Crane seems to be a mistake (or the text of Ironblood is), but if you look at Crane and Mountain, they both say "The only Strikes you can make are...". Therefore they contradict and can't be fused.

[Vlorax]

Iron_Matt17 wrote:

Level 20 Monk feat.

It seems to be simple enough, but on further reflection it seems to get more confusing. Which stances can I fuse? And which can't I? (furthermore why can't Ironblood and Crane fuse? What does "using one type of strike." mean?

It looks like they're is a typo in the example or in iron blood stance.

What it means is that crane stance only lets you make Crane Wing attacks, same with mountain stance (only falling stone attacks). But tiger/wolf/dragon just give you extra attack options but don't require that you only use those attacks.

So you can fuse any of the ones that don't force one type of an attack roll. Which I'm pretty sure let's you combine wild winds stance with iron blood

You could also fuse one of the monk stances with a stance from another class like fighter

[Iron_Matt17]

So what you guys are saying is that we can't fuse Crane and Mountain with any others? But the others are free to fuse? So, for example, I can fuse Tiger and Tangled Forest? And if I did, what would the damage look like? 2d8S? How would that work with Striking runes? Or what about if I fused Dragon and Tiger instead? One's 1d8S and the other is 1d10B? Which would the Striking rune work off of?
Thanks for the help guys...

[FowlJ]

The attacks don't combine. You would be able to make Tiger stance attacks or Tangled Forest attacks, while gaining the non-attack benefits of both stances (10 foot steps from Tiger stance and the movement prevention effect of Tangled Forest).

[lordcirth]

Iron_Matt17 wrote:

So what you guys are saying is that we can't fuse Crane and Mountain with any others?

You could fuse Crane with a compatible stance, but you'd be restricted to Crane Wing Strikes, which are fairly weak in terms of damage.

[breithauptclan]

Iron_Matt17 wrote:

So what you guys are saying is that we can't fuse Crane and Mountain with any others?

Actually, I think you could fuse the two stances together. You just wouldn't be able to make any attacks. You would still get all the buffs of each stance though.

Maybe that would be a houserule though.

[Iron_Matt17]

FowlJ wrote:

The attacks don't combine. You would be able to make Tiger stance attacks or Tangled Forest attacks, while gaining the non-attack benefits of both stances (10 foot steps from Tiger stance and the movement prevention effect of Tangled Forest).

Ok, so what about Tigers crit bleed? Could I crit with a Tangled Forest strike and apply the persistent bleed?

Also, is there anywhere else in the CRB where we can find a similar feat or ability that might shed light on this feat? ie. where are you guys interpreting this feat from? Or is this how you think it was written as intended?

[lordcirth]

Iron_Matt17 wrote:

FowlJ wrote:

The attacks don't combine. You would be able to make Tiger stance attacks or Tangled Forest attacks, while gaining the non-attack benefits of both stances (10 foot steps from Tiger stance and the movement prevention effect of Tangled Forest).

Ok, so what about Tigers crit bleed? Could I crit with a Tangled Forest strike and apply the persistent bleed?

Also, is there anywhere else in the CRB where we can find a similar feat or ability that might shed light on this feat? ie. where are you guys interpreting this feat from? Or is this how you think it was written as intended?

As I read it, Tiger Stance says "On a critical success with your tiger claws, if you deal damage, the target takes 1d4 persistent bleed damage."

Ie, only Tiger Claw attacks can cause the bleed. It doesn't say that any unarmed attack while in tiger stance cause bleed. However, I don't think this is a bad thing, given that Tiger Claw attacks are pretty great, and Lashing Branch attacks aren't any better. The main advantage of Tangled Forest is the enemy immobilization.

[PossibleCabbage]

Regarding Ironblood, this requires errata as there is no text in ironblood stance restricting the strikes you can make.

Quote:

You enter the stance of impenetrable iron, refusing to yield to any blow. You can make iron sweep unarmed attacks.

As opposed to

Quote:

You enter the stance of a crane ... the only Strikes you can make are crane wing attacks

or

Quote:

You enter the stance of an implacable mountain—... The only Strikes you can make are falling stone unarmed attacks.

Until we get errata, I'm left to conclude that the only two styles which cannot be fused are crane and mountain.