Giant Instinct and Titan Mauler


Rules Discussion

51 to 87 of 87 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Rysky wrote:
Miy2Cents wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Large sized weapons take up no more space to wield than medium size weapons due, as there is no "space" required to wield weapons. The only thing that would impact you're ability to use weapons are things that explicitly say they do. Like being restrained (critical effect of grapple) or being swallowed whole). Clumsy isn't...

Ill explain "Large sized weapons take up no more space to wield than medium size weapons" to my DM and see what she says.

Tell her to read the rulebook if she has issues with it. Small, Medium, and Large weapons take the same space.

Is it a gamification and not realistic? Yes.

I understand but your still talking about - Theatre of the mind - and there should be both advantage and disadvantage to Large weapons

This is a class that that specialises in Large weapons as there shtick. Should they be penalised for that?

Its like say Hard-coding Enfeebled 1 to the Champion at L3 as a drain (to pay for the link) for having a Divine Ally, its not like they can Choose not to have one.


Squiggit wrote:
Miy2Cents wrote:


But what I'm saying is that the Other subclass's get NO downside to there choice, so in fact they get different abilities "for nothing" when compared to Giant.

Again though, that's kind of the point. Giant Instinct gets the biggest bonus, but it comes with a tradeoff associated with it.

If you want to get rid of the downside, you'd inevitably have to take away or significantly reduce the upside as well and that just leaves the instinct less interesting and more homogenous.

Honestly, if you don't want the giant flavor and to deal with the mechanics involve, maybe look at playing a Fury barb instead.

What I would like is for this new system to be the best it can be and part of that is that is gets a good hard look see by the greatest test bed in the world - We the Player's.

Why should Giant extra damage (2 extra on Dragon) need a trade off? - Non of the others have such a negative attached to them, and in a game that crits not just on a 20 but at +10 that negative matters.


Giant Instinct is certainly the best Instinct once you add AoO and Titan Stature. Hence the very big drawback.
Dragon Instinct suffer from the elemental type of the extra damage. If you choose something like acid, you will rarely face immune enemies, but you will rarely use the resistance yourself. If you choose something like fire, the resistance gets quite good, but you'll lose your rage additional damage a lot.
Fury is the worst Instinct, by far, unless you play a campaign where all/most enemies are humanoids. Then, the resistance can be excellent.
Spirit Instinct has issues against constructs (but they are not very common enemies) and also when you have a mix of undeads and living creatures as you can't switch between the two types. Also, the resistance is not very good unless you play Ravenloft.
Animal Instinct is very special. Having both hands free and still 1d10 damage is a very nice feature. But no range attack which is a huge drawback. I think it's the kind of Instinct best suited for some weird multiclassing.

In my opinion, if something deserves some love, it's Fury Instinct. I hope they'll release some very nice feats in the APG to make up for the lack of strength.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Miy2Cents wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Miy2Cents wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Large sized weapons take up no more space to wield than medium size weapons due, as there is no "space" required to wield weapons. The only thing that would impact you're ability to use weapons are things that explicitly say they do. Like being restrained (critical effect of grapple) or being swallowed whole). Clumsy isn't...

Ill explain "Large sized weapons take up no more space to wield than medium size weapons" to my DM and see what she says.

Tell her to read the rulebook if she has issues with it. Small, Medium, and Large weapons take the same space.

Is it a gamification and not realistic? Yes.

I understand but your still talking about - Theatre of the mind - and there should be both advantage and disadvantage to Large weapons

This is a class that that specialises in Large weapons as there shtick. Should they be penalised for that?

Its like say Hard-coding Enfeebled 1 to the Champion at L3 as a drain (to pay for the link) for having a Divine Ally, its not like they can Choose not to have one.

Then why are arguing against them?


Lightning Raven wrote:

I created a Giant Instinct Barbarian and simply ignored all the Giant feats. It definitely changes up the initial paradigm of "normal guy" wielding a overly large weapon. That's certainly not something I was expecting to be the sole theme of this instinct. Hopefully in the future new feats are introduced to this class path.

Gladly there's a lot of other cool feats that Barbarian has access to, so I didn't felt pigeon-holed into the subclass feats.

I think this is a cool concept. The rage description says you might be someone with over sized emotions. Considering his love of heavy swords, I could see someone using Titan Mauler to recreate Kirito from SAO, skip the giant instinct feats like you have done, and get Ranger or Fighter feats instead to make him more sword skill lethal. That plus the insane damage is cool. Driven by his strong will and desire to protect those around him, he risks his own life in an impassioned attack. Normally, he doesn't reveal his biggest sword, but when raging, he goes two weapon and draws the big one. You could even go large long sword and large short sword to get agile for more accurate 2nd/3rd attacks. Since it's large, titan mauler says it gets +6 damage off the bat so no half damage for being agile (This last part admittedly sounds weird. How can it be agile and clumsy? If it is agile, is it half bonus dmg anyway? etc. I'm sure someone will rage over this, because... internet.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Miy2Cents wrote:
BellyBeard wrote:

In exchange for the most bonus damage and (later) reach, you take a -1 penalty to AC and Reflex.

There are no instances where you could wield a medium weapon in a space and cannot wield a large weapon in that same space, at least not in the rules. I suppose if you had a GM who wanted to make stuff up like that it could be a restriction. Changing to large or huge size, though an iconic ability of the instinct, is not required for the bonus damage at all, so small spaces where you can't enlarge might be less fun since your feats are ineffective but you'll still be more than capable of fighting in those cases.

Reach in this systems is what? 1 maybe 2 AoO (way less than PF1) and although it reduces the need to move as much so incease your number of attacks in a combat - its still not what it was.

As to going Large - Ill give you that one, at least its not Hard-coded i into the Signature ability like using a Large Weapon. :)

Reach is important because you can melee the enemy but, if their reach doesn't match, they have to spend an action to get closer. This can provoke an AoO if they have significantly less reach (more than 1 square movement), and AoO strongly deters them from attacking allies, so it's a damned-if-you-do situation for them, and either way they're wasting at least one action on moving. Use a flail or hammer and your AoO with no MAP will knock them prone on a crit, wasting more actions. If you can reliably get rid of one more action, such as an ally throwing a slow spell or using a trip, they only get one or no actions on their turn. That's huge in a game where many to most enemies have devastating three and two action attacks which you can pretty effectively shut down. For a non-reach character similar tactics will involve moving away on your turn, losing out on damage potential, and AoO can only be used if you stand right against them and take their full damage.

Besides this, large/huge size and good reach just makes you a more effective meat shield for your team, as the enemies have to spend more movement to get around your threatened area. I think this is a thing where on paper the increased reach doesn't look that good, but in practice it grants a large number of benefits.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Reach is god.

And being able to have 5 or 10 reach without having to sacrifice your weapon ( you could use a pick with 10 reach, just to make an example )

Eventually you will save actions because you won't need to use an action to move.

And trigger aoo will be way easier.

Finally, the clumsy condition will count less if you use your reach to stay far from your enemies.

I suggest people to try out what having 5/10/15 reach means ( with the highest rage bonus damage ever, and the possibility to use maneuvers from weapons, higher dmg because of traits and weapon type, or other stuff you won't have if you'd choose to go for reach weapons).


Yeah, a huge barbarian with a war flail and the extra reach feat will be a monster at high levels. All your attacks have a small chance of tripping, Assurance for auto-trip third actions if you don't get the free procs, and AoO's that have a chance of a free trip to throw a wrench in enemy actions. With 20' reach on an already Huge character you claim a massive chunk of the battlefield. This doesn't even use too many feats so you have plenty more to play with.


Be careful, as Assurance doesn't work at high level. Because you can't have attribute, status and item bonuses, you fall behind most enemy saves. At level 20, there's only one level 19 creature you can trip with assurance and 3 level 18 out of 10. You have to face level -4 creatures to have a reliable (50%) chance to third action trip.


SuperBidi wrote:
Be careful, as Assurance doesn't work at high level. Because you can't have attribute, status and item bonuses, you fall behind most enemy saves. At level 20, there's only one level 19 creature you can trip with assurance and 3 level 18 out of 10. You have to face level -4 creatures to have a reliable (50%) chance to third action trip.

Sorry, I didn't include that it's only auto-trip only against significantly weaker enemies, and I was talking about a high level character when that's most important.


Rysky wrote:
Miy2Cents wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Miy2Cents wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Large sized weapons take up no more space to wield than medium size weapons due, as there is no "space" required to wield weapons. The only thing that would impact you're ability to use weapons are things that explicitly say they do. Like being restrained (critical effect of grapple) or being swallowed whole). Clumsy isn't...

Ill explain "Large sized weapons take up no more space to wield than medium size weapons" to my DM and see what she says.

Tell her to read the rulebook if she has issues with it. Small, Medium, and Large weapons take the same space.

Is it a gamification and not realistic? Yes.

I understand but your still talking about - Theatre of the mind - and there should be both advantage and disadvantage to Large weapons

This is a class that that specialises in Large weapons as there shtick. Should they be penalised for that?

Its like say Hard-coding Enfeebled 1 to the Champion at L3 as a drain (to pay for the link) for having a Divine Ally, its not like they can Choose not to have one.

Then why are arguing against them?

I'm not really arguing, I'm looking to point out what I see as a flaw in Paizo's logic. For everybody else Large weapons are a wast, more of a hazard than help, of no benefit to your average fighter on the street. They have no bonus and still have a penalty so whats the point of ever wielding one. But for the Giant BB, they are their Bread and Butter. So why should they still be penalised for using them why not make it a class feature, something to say I own this rather than just O you can use them hears an extra +2 damage for your trouble but you cant use them well enough to be exempt from the same penalty as every body else.

I'm not saying add more damage, or reduce the damage, there damage is fine. - I'm saying they should not have a hard-coded penalty to using their Signature ability - They can wield the weapon so giving them clumsy makes no scene. Is there even one other Class in the game that has a hard-coded penalty to a Signature ability like them?

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

*points at Oracle*


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Miy2Cents wrote:
Is there even one other Class in the game that has a hard-coded penalty to a Signature ability like them?

You mean like how spells trigger a bunch of reactions, or how alchemists are in a similar position because their signature ability takes more bulk and more actions to do?

Or how there's a monster in the bestiary that basically exists to eat fighter's livelihood?

There are a lot of "here's your penalty just for being you" kind of things in the game if you go looking for them.


Miy2Cents wrote:
I'm not saying add more damage, or reduce the damage, there damage is fine. - I'm saying they should not have a hard-coded penalty to using their Signature ability - They can wield the weapon...

If you remove the penalty, their damage has to go in line with Fury Instinct. I'm sorry, but a Barbarian with a Large Greatsword doing less damage than most kinds of Barbarians is hurting me. I clearly understand the malus from using a disproportionate weapon. And I kind of want it to be something useful, not just flavorful.

Now, if you want a flavorful Barbarian, play a Fury one, and say that your weapon is incredibly large. And you have what you want.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Miy2Cents wrote:
Vlorax wrote:
There's nothing wrong with Giant Instinct and Titan Mauler no matter how many times people complain and post homebrew trying to "fix" it.
I beg to differ, that's why I'm pointing out the issues. Hard-coding a Signature ability to a Negative. Show me were that's done elsewhere in the rules? Do Paladins have some negative to there special AoO?, Wizards get a penalty to casting spells?

yes, if they use it to kill a random peasant they lose all their class abilities...


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Miy2Cents wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:

man a lot of people don't seem to realize that pathfinder has large sized weapon do no additional benefit and, except for a giant instinct barbarian, have double the bulk. it's written off as the weapon being too unwieldy to provide more benefit over a sword designed for your size.

But should it be? - Large weapons have been part of RPG's for every - is it right to just wright them off into a side bar? Where is the Heroic fantasy?

Also I had forgotten about the Double bulk - so theirs and other Negative to add into the SIGNATURE ability.

double bulk is for anyone not a barbarian.

also yes, because it's something that pretty much never came up for 99% of players.

in 3.5 i'm pretty sure it was the center of many broken builds, in pf1 it gave you a -2 to-hit for a 1 dice increment increase, which meant it was only worth it on 2 handed weapons, etc.

now, large sized weapons are specifically only for titan maulers and you take a -1 to your AC more or less while wielding it, and in exchange you deal a fair amount of extra damage.

all this talk of losing you weapon, yet that's nigh impossible unless you're facing a very overleveled enemy that specifically tries to disarm you (you're only disarmed on a crit success) and then has a lackey pick it up and run away.


thenobledrake wrote:
Miy2Cents wrote:
Is there even one other Class in the game that has a hard-coded penalty to a Signature ability like them?

You mean like how spells trigger a bunch of reactions, or how alchemists are in a similar position because their signature ability takes more bulk and more actions to do?

Or how there's a monster in the bestiary that basically exists to eat fighter's livelihood?

There are a lot of "here's your penalty just for being you" kind of things in the game if you go looking for them.

I see those as external to any class - Here you have a hard-coded penalty to a Signature ability, its baked into holding the weapon, there is no circumstance were you can even use the Signature ability with out being inflicted with the penalty. Where as, your observations above are situational depending on PC circumstances, standing to close to a creature with AoO, (so a Choice) etc.


Bandw2 wrote:
Miy2Cents wrote:
Vlorax wrote:
There's nothing wrong with Giant Instinct and Titan Mauler no matter how many times people complain and post homebrew trying to "fix" it.
I beg to differ, that's why I'm pointing out the issues. Hard-coding a Signature ability to a Negative. Show me were that's done elsewhere in the rules? Do Paladins have some negative to there special AoO?, Wizards get a penalty to casting spells?
yes, if they use it to kill a random peasant they lose all their class abilities...

if they - is the point - as a Signature ability they do not get a choice - use it and get the penalty or don't and then whats the point?

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

[for Giant Instinct] That you do more damage than all the other Instincts with no other drawbacks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Miy2Cents wrote:
thenobledrake wrote:
Miy2Cents wrote:
Is there even one other Class in the game that has a hard-coded penalty to a Signature ability like them?

You mean like how spells trigger a bunch of reactions, or how alchemists are in a similar position because their signature ability takes more bulk and more actions to do?

Or how there's a monster in the bestiary that basically exists to eat fighter's livelihood?

There are a lot of "here's your penalty just for being you" kind of things in the game if you go looking for them.

I see those as external to any class - Here you have a hard-coded penalty to a Signature ability, its baked into holding the weapon, there is no circumstance were you can even use the Signature ability with out being inflicted with the penalty. Where as, your observations above are situational depending on PC circumstances, standing to close to a creature with AoO, (so a Choice) etc.

Hey, you realize all barbarians take an AC penalty for using their signature ability, right? It is called Rage. The Giant Instinct takes a slightly worse penalty but gets bigger returns on its damage for it.


Bandw2 wrote:
Miy2Cents wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:

man a lot of people don't seem to realize that pathfinder has large sized weapon do no additional benefit and, except for a giant instinct barbarian, have double the bulk. it's written off as the weapon being too unwieldy to provide more benefit over a sword designed for your size.

But should it be? - Large weapons have been part of RPG's for every - is it right to just wright them off into a side bar? Where is the Heroic fantasy?

Also I had forgotten about the Double bulk - so theirs and other Negative to add into the SIGNATURE ability.

double bulk is for anyone not a barbarian.

also yes, because it's something that pretty much never came up for 99% of players.

in 3.5 i'm pretty sure it was the center of many broken builds, in pf1 it gave you a -2 to-hit for a 1 dice increment increase, which meant it was only worth it on 2 handed weapons, etc.

now, large sized weapons are specifically only for titan maulers and you take a -1 to your AC more or less while wielding it, and in exchange you deal a fair amount of extra damage.

all this talk of losing you weapon, yet that's nigh impossible unless you're facing a very overleveled enemy that specifically tries to disarm you (you're only disarmed on a crit success) and then has a lackey pick it up and run away.

Double bulk - But as Large weapons have no effect on the damage - there is no point to using one so for everybody else - its not a problem but as its core to the SIGNATURE ability it has to be factored in as another negative.

take a -1 to your AC - Actual remember you are Raging so that's -2 to your AC.

Every Creature you encounter is at +2 to hit, so a +2 increase chance to Critical. This penalty is Hard-coded in the instinct with no choice. So your swinging a large weapon (that you now have the skill to wielded) but not well enough to avoid becoming Clumsy 1 how is that reasonable? This is a weapon that is at the very core of your sub class, for just an extra +2 damage more than Dragon.

Does it not make more sense to say - You can wield this weapon without suffering the Clumsy 1 penalty from wielded a larger sized weapon. You would still acquire Clumsy 1 from becoming size large with the L6 Feat. Which then would make it a choice to take that action.


Rysky wrote:
[for Giant Instinct] That you do more damage than all the other Instincts with no other drawbacks.

no other drawbacks - ? Whats Clumsy 1 then? Or do you mean to say you don't consider the original -1 to AC from rage as a drawback?

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

In comparison to the other Instincts, which deal elemental damage so there's fights where that might not help them. Or animal where you can't use weapons.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

My big issue is the weapon itself. I hate that you need this stupid special weapon to use your abilities. I would prefer having the extra damage and the clumsy penalty because I'm bigger and stronger than anyone else due to my giant powers, not because I have a stupid looking weapon.

It irritates me to no end that the only reason Giant Instinct is like that is because of Amiri. I don't wanna play any of the damn iconics, I wanna play my own character.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
HeHateMe wrote:

My big issue is the weapon itself. I hate that you need this stupid special weapon to use your abilities. I would prefer having the extra damage and the clumsy penalty because I'm bigger and stronger than anyone else due to my giant powers, not because I have a stupid looking weapon.

It irritates me to no end that the only reason Giant Instinct is like that is because of Amiri. I don't wanna play any of the damn iconics, I wanna play my own character.

No, giant Instinct is like that because wanting to play someone with an unreasonably large sword is a very popular trope in fiction. You may not like it, but lots of people do. There's a reason 3 of them have been rolled up in games I've run since the playtest dropped, and it ain't Amiri.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"the only reason Giant Instinct is like that is because of Amiri" okay... but why is Amiri like that?


Captain Morgan wrote:
HeHateMe wrote:

My big issue is the weapon itself. I hate that you need this stupid special weapon to use your abilities. I would prefer having the extra damage and the clumsy penalty because I'm bigger and stronger than anyone else due to my giant powers, not because I have a stupid looking weapon.

It irritates me to no end that the only reason Giant Instinct is like that is because of Amiri. I don't wanna play any of the damn iconics, I wanna play my own character.

No, giant Instinct is like that because wanting to play someone with an unreasonably large sword is a very popular trope in fiction. You may not like it, but lots of people do. There's a reason 3 of them have been rolled up in games I've run since the playtest dropped, and it ain't Amiri.

That's a trope? I've read a ton of fantasy books and never even seen that. Must be a manga thing I guess, I don't pay much attention to that genre.

That explains it at least.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

BFS trope

Exists in plentitudes of fiction outside of Manga/Anime, and dating all the way back to the epic of Gilgamesh.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

BFS trope

Exists in plentitudes of fiction outside of Manga/Anime, and dating all the way back to the epic of Gilgamesh.

Ah I see now, thank you.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Np ^w^


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hate the big weapon thing. It feels like a trashy anime.

I think the giant instinct is not particular strong vs bosses. The terrible ac combined with no accuracy bonus (like rangers or fighters have) isn't great.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

*shrugs*

Not unique to anime.


Miy2Cents wrote:
Does it not make more sense to say - You can wield this weapon without suffering the Clumsy 1 penalty from wielded a larger sized weapon. You would still acquire Clumsy 1 from becoming size large with the L6 Feat. Which then would make it a choice to take that action.

It's already there, it's called Fury Instinct.


puksone wrote:

I hate the big weapon thing. It feels like a trashy anime.

I think the giant instinct is not particular strong vs bosses. The terrible ac combined with no accuracy bonus (like rangers or fighters have) isn't great.

One word for you, mister(or miss): Berserk.

Look it up.


puksone wrote:
I think the giant instinct is not particular strong vs bosses. The terrible ac combined with no accuracy bonus (like rangers or fighters have) isn't great.

The accuracy is Normal.

A fighter has indeed more chance to hit, but his bonus flat damage is lower than yours.

Same goes for ranger, I guess ( I don't know ranger feats ).

Having reach will also allow you to position between both enemies and allies, trigger aoo more frequently, and save actions like step / stride, since you will be mostly at range with your attacks.

Eventually you could use that "extra" action per turn to gain temporary hp, to trade part of the damage taken.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
HeHateMe wrote:

My big issue is the weapon itself. I hate that you need this stupid special weapon to use your abilities. I would prefer having the extra damage and the clumsy penalty because I'm bigger and stronger than anyone else due to my giant powers, not because I have a stupid looking weapon.

It irritates me to no end that the only reason Giant Instinct is like that is because of Amiri. I don't wanna play any of the damn iconics, I wanna play my own character.

titan mauler was a thing in pf1 as well.

all it let you do was wield really big weapons though. no becoming super sized.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Bandw2 wrote:
HeHateMe wrote:

My big issue is the weapon itself. I hate that you need this stupid special weapon to use your abilities. I would prefer having the extra damage and the clumsy penalty because I'm bigger and stronger than anyone else due to my giant powers, not because I have a stupid looking weapon.

It irritates me to no end that the only reason Giant Instinct is like that is because of Amiri. I don't wanna play any of the damn iconics, I wanna play my own character.

titan mauler was a thing in pf1 as well.

all it let you do was wield really big weapons though. no becoming super sized.

And before that in 3rd edition DnD we had Monkey Grip.

51 to 87 of 87 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / Giant Instinct and Titan Mauler All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.