A build from 1e and 3.5 I can't make in 2e (AM I Right!)

[Indi523]

Ok so I have a build for a character I really like and it seems to problematic to do in 2e.

Essentially the background is he is a half orc, tall and strong (at least 16 and definitely highest stat with the next best stat being dex). The background is he is a gladiator who grew up in the pits. This was a fairly even multiclass character build starting out as fighter and the next level rogue and then repeating in that order. The character learned to fight bare handed because many times he was not given a weapon and forced to fight armed opponents. Eventually he picked up the spiked chain as an exotic weapon early on for the spectacle of the weapon.

The only weapons the character used were his hands, a spiked chain and a sling although he learned to fight with all the others in order to combat those styles in the arena.

So Starting as a fighter his first feat was Unarmed Combat as his beginning feat and Exotic Weapon Proficiency Spiked Chain as his fighter feat. From that point on he chose the combat reflexes rogue talent, weapon specialization in unarmed and then spiked chain, improved trip and as he leveled up rogue talents that provided combat feats or combat abilities and fighter feat that complemented his fighting style.

The idea was that he was not a monk but learned to fight with his hands unarmed and used his strength and weapon proficiency to make up for the d3 or d4 damage.

Now for this build to work unarmed combat was a must as he needed to not have the negative penalty to do lethal damage.

Right now 2e has no real way to do this. To come close you have to archetype as a monk first and cannot add rogue until 8th level which is completely contrary to the character concept. He was a rogue because the pit taught him by necessity to fight dirty. I think if I remember improved feint was on the list to eventually get. He did not take any levels of monk because he was the opposite of what a monk would be. He was a bare knuckled grindy cage fighter relying on wits and rage.

So it seems that this build is not doable in 2e which is too bad! Am I right however. Is there some other way to do this and no I don't mean gauntlets. It seems unarmed attack proficiency or whatever it is called (can't remember) is now a monk only class feature.

If this is correct will future supplements address this.

[Laran]

You are correct. I do not know of a way currently to avoid the -2 to attack when making lethal unarmed attacks without taking either Monk primary or Multiclass into monk

Powerful Fist is a CLASS feature of monk. They appear to have wanted to limit good lethal unarmed attacks to monks.

Whether future supplements will change this, nobody knows (except the devs at Paizo maybe)

[Cyouni]

Given what you've said, I'd recommend a Ruffian Rogue with Monk Dedication, which would probably fit the best. Depending on how Unconventional Weaponry is ruled, that would likely be the best way to keep your proficiency scaling as well. If you focused around Athletics, that's also a strong mechanical option as well as showing the background.

APG has a very good chance of having an unarmed archetype as well.

[Mellack]

That character sounds very much to me like a monk. Their entire life was focused on learning how to fight. They didn't get to rely on heavy armor or big weapons. They had to learn how to use their body as a weapon. They had to learn from the greatest teacher of all, the arena. Their mind had to learn how to focus. How to spot advantages, and how to move to exploit them. Works as a monk for me.

[Ventnor]

Honestly, I think this character could probably work as a monk multiclassed into rogue. 2e Monks are not the supernatural, always-lawful characters they were in 1e. They still can be, of course, but they don't have to be.

[Malk_Content]

It could work as fighter base if you are happy to change the unarmed aesthetic to a gauntlet one. This would deal with the non lethal problem and if you get doubling rings would let you pick up other weapons (like your chain) on the go and keep your potency and striking runes.

[Captain Morgan]

As the examples given above illustrate, getting hung up on class names being written on your sheet is going to be a big barrier to you this early in the systems lifetime. But if you instead focus on what the character is meant to do thematically and mechanically, you can usually create a pretty solid conversion.

More specifically, while your character started as a fighter in PF1 there really doesn't seem to be a good reason to use the fighter class in PF2, which is almost entirely defined by its proficiency with weapons and armor. (Future material may change this of course, but as it stands now you've got no good reason to include the fighter class.)

Using one of the suggestions above seems like the way to go. Barbarian might also be worth considering, as animal instinct gets excellent unarmed options, but their anethema prevents you from using weapons while raging. So ruffian rogue and/or monk seem more appropriate.

[Lanathar]

In response to the Captain's points I would like to point the OP to the following blog (a couple of articles picked specifically):

http://taking10.blogspot.com/2015/07/whats-in-name-how-your-characters-clas s.html

http://taking10.blogspot.com/2018/04/the-non-problem-of-making-monks-fit.ht ml

Ventnor also has a very valid point about the nature of monks in 2E. Removal of Ki abilities, wisdom focus and the alignment restriction from the standard chassis makes them far more of an open space design wise

For example I do not expect we will ever get a Brawler in 2E because the new monk chassis means it is not necessary.

[Unicore]

This definitely sounds like a monk to me that focuses on fighting with weapons. I’d probably go monk, fighter MC and use fighter feats to benefit from making foes flat footed. MCing into rogue for a massively substandard sneak attack mechanic feels like a waste of time, and fighter feats have plenty of options for fighting dirty. MCing rogue is much more about skills, which don’t seem like this character’s shtick. Narratively, I think your character will feel closest this way and you will have a lot of interesting and fun feat options that might help the character feel more realized in PF2 than in PF1.

[Ediwir]

I mean, it could also be a Fighter. Unarmed strikes are there, and the difference between nonlethal and lethal is minimal nowadays. It would fit the idea of just going in and grabbing whatever weapon you can get your hands on.

It’s perfectly doable, you just need to figure out which angle you’re approaching from.

[Castilliano]

As Cyouni says, Ruffian Rogue except fists are unarmed attacks which means they don't work w/ Sneak Attack. You could use gauntlets for the same imagery though. Or you could go w/ Precision Ranger, skinning the bonus damage as "fighting dirty after noting their weaknesses via Hunt Prey". Plus the Ranger overlaps w/ some Rogue feats and has enough skills to be roguish. The bonus damage would work both w/ fists & the chain.

The Spiked Chain will be like a ball & chain, taking up feats w/ little payoff, though if you can get access to it (since it's Uncommon), you don't necessarily need to get better proficiency if you don't attack w/ it. By which I'm saying, you could Disarm & Trip w/ it w/o any penalties since those are Athletics checks. The rest of your build is easy to make, but it's hard for anyone to make good enough use of the chain to make it worth investing into...unless you really like those maneuvers which funnily enough don't need that investment.

Essentially the build is possible, it's just not as good as before, especially w/o reach on the Spiked Chain.

Also:
You could go Fighter, which even w/ the -2 penalty for attacking lethally (which doesn't matter as much in PF2 BTW) you'll have as high an attack bonus as a Monk due to superior proficiency.
Even w/ MCD Rogue, I'm not sure how "Roguish" you'll be though, though you would get Sneak Attack...though again not w/ Unarmed Strikes.

A Barbarian w/ Ape Instinct is a furious puncher and has all the makings of a pit fighter. It doesn't mesh well w/ a Spiked Chain since you shouldn't use it while raging, but you'd be fighting savagely/"dirty" and have great dice + a great damage bonus.

[theservantsllcleanitup]

SNEAK ATTACK
ROGUE CLASS FEATURE 1+
When your enemy can’t properly defend itself, you take advantage to deal extra damage. If you Strike a creature that has the flat-footed condition (page 620) with an agile or finesse melee weapon, an agile or finesse unarmed attack, or a ranged weapon attack, you deal an extra 1d6 precision damage. For a ranged attack with a thrown melee weapon, that weapon must also be agile or finesse.

[Indi523]

Very interesting points....

I assumed the Monk was all about meditation. I am seeing that one could not take the more eastern style feats. There is definitely a way to build something similar with this build.

Still the Monk gains Mystic and metal strikes which leads to the supernatural nature of a monk.

Fighters do have some options. They gain AOC which was key to the old build. But they also have feats like combat grab and powerful shoves that would really assist in fleshing out the character. Still I would have to go with gauntlets. I suppose leather gauntlets with the fingers cut out count otherwise I'd have to explain it as metal sheets along the fingers.

The Rogue gets the distracting feint feat which would meld nicely with the concept. The idea was that in combat the character would feint first leaving the opponent flat footed and then deliver a powerful sucker punch which is what the precision damage was about.

Armor is not that much of a concern. My character usually wore no better than leather armor unless in a gladiatorial fight and even then that armor was piecemeal (using the later rules).

I think I'll try posting a build as monk, ruffian rogue and fighter and see how it goes.

[The Gleeful Grognard]

Doesn't nonlethal just mean you take a -2 circumstance penalty on your last attack if you want to deal a lethal blow?

I mean, assuming the player will not know the HP of the foe? The other option being knocking them out then choosing to swap to lethal attacks when they are on the ground and unconscious.

Personally I wouldn't get hung up on names of classes or feats too much as others have said before. A monk with rogue dedication seems like it would do you fine. A fighter with gauntlets too.

[Ediwir]

The Gleeful Grognard wrote:

Doesn't nonlethal just mean you take a -2 circumstance penalty on your last attack if you want to deal a lethal blow?

Normally yes, but some creatures may be immune to nonlethal.

Other than that, zero difference, really.

[Castilliano]

theservantsllcleanitup wrote:

SNEAK ATTACK

ROGUE CLASS FEATURE 1+
When your enemy can’t properly defend itself, you take advantage to deal extra damage. If you Strike a creature that has the flat-footed condition (page 620) with an agile or finesse melee weapon, an agile or finesse unarmed attack, or a ranged weapon attack, you deal an extra 1d6 precision damage. For a ranged attack with a thrown melee weapon, that weapon must also be agile or finesse.

My bad. Was thinking of the Dex-to-damage.

So Ruffian Rogue totally works for the fists/dirty fighting aspect.

[Taja the Barbarian]

Castilliano wrote:

theservantsllcleanitup wrote:

SNEAK ATTACK

ROGUE CLASS FEATURE 1+
When your enemy can’t properly defend itself, you take advantage to deal extra damage. If you Strike a creature that has the flat-footed condition (page 620) with an agile or finesse melee weapon, an agile or finesse unarmed attack, or a ranged weapon attack, you deal an extra 1d6 precision damage. For a ranged attack with a thrown melee weapon, that weapon must also be agile or finesse.

My bad. Was thinking of the Dex-to-damage.

So Ruffian Rogue totally works for the fists/dirty fighting aspect.

Technically speaking, a Ruffian getting Sneak Attack with fists is questionable:

Baseline Rogue Sneak Attack ability specifically allows Unarmed Strikes that meet the criteria

Sneak Attack wrote:

If you Strike a creature that has the flat-footed condition (page 620) with an agile or finesse melee weapon, an agile or finesse unarmed attack, or a ranged weapon attack, you deal an extra 1d6 precision damage.

The Ruffian racket alters this ability:

rogue / Ruffian (p180) wrote:

You can deal sneak attack damage with any simple weapon, in addition to the weapons listed in the sneak attack class feature.

This all sounds good, except for the fact that Unarmed Attacks are not weapons:

Chapter 6: Equipment / Weapons / Unarmed Attacks wrote:

Almost all characters start out trained in unarmed attacks. You can Strike with your fist or another body part, calculating your attack and damage rolls in the same way you would with a weapon. Unarmed attacks can belong to a weapon group (page 280), and they might have weapon traits (page 282). However, unarmed attacks aren’t weapons, and effects and abilities that work with weapons never work with unarmed attacks unless they specifically say so.

So, there are a couple of ways to read this:

• The Ruffian text replaces the attacks from the baseline ability and therefore can not sneak attack with unarmed attacks.
• The Ruffian text replaces the weapons from the baseline ability so a Ruffian can still sneak attack with 'an agile or finesse unarmed attack' like any other rogue.

I'd probably go with the latter interpretation, but that's just me...

[Midnightoker]

I agree with the latter interpretation you have.

But even with that interpretation, this means a Ruffian rogue cannot utilize stances that alter strike traits for unarmed attack sneak attacks.

Somewhat disappointing. A mountain Stance ruffian rogue could have been interesting.

[Qaianna]

Taja the Barbarian wrote:

Castilliano wrote:

theservantsllcleanitup wrote:

SNEAK ATTACK

ROGUE CLASS FEATURE 1+
When your enemy can’t properly defend itself, you take advantage to deal extra damage. If you Strike a creature that has the flat-footed condition (page 620) with an agile or finesse melee weapon, an agile or finesse unarmed attack, or a ranged weapon attack, you deal an extra 1d6 precision damage. For a ranged attack with a thrown melee weapon, that weapon must also be agile or finesse.

My bad. Was thinking of the Dex-to-damage.

So Ruffian Rogue totally works for the fists/dirty fighting aspect.

Technically speaking, a Ruffian getting Sneak Attack with fists is questionable:

Baseline Rogue Sneak Attack ability specifically allows Unarmed Strikes that meet the criteria

Sneak Attack wrote:

If you Strike a creature that has the flat-footed condition (page 620) with an agile or finesse melee weapon, an agile or finesse unarmed attack, or a ranged weapon attack, you deal an extra 1d6 precision damage.

The Ruffian racket alters this ability:

rogue / Ruffian (p180) wrote:

You can deal sneak attack damage with any simple weapon, in addition to the weapons listed in the sneak attack class feature.

This all sounds good, except for the fact that Unarmed Attacks are not weapons:

Chapter 6: Equipment / Weapons / Unarmed Attacks wrote:

Almost all characters start out trained in unarmed attacks. You can Strike with your fist or another body part, calculating your attack and damage rolls in the same way you would with a weapon. Unarmed attacks can belong to a weapon group (page 280), and they might have weapon traits (page 282). However, unarmed attacks aren’t weapons, and effects and abilities that work with weapons never work with unarmed attacks unless they specifically say so.

So, there are a couple of ways to read this:[list]

The Ruffian text replaces the attacks from the baseline ability and therefore can not sneak attack with unarmed attacks.

The Ruffian text replaces the weapons from the baseline ability so a Ruffian can still sneak attack with 'an agile or finesse unarmed attack' like any other rogue.

I'd probably go with the latter interpretation, but that's just me...

I'd agree that in this case it's just an addition to the text, rather than excising text that already grants an exception. Besides, it's easy to imagine a ruffian rogue sucker-punching a victim.