Yup, probably missing a requirement or trait.
I think if the Strike would hit, then they have to make the save. No damage dealt. MAP applies. If your strike is a crit, then treat their save as 1 worse. It also has the incapacitation trait.
At first glance it looks like it does damage, but I think that's the key bit. Though stunned 3 on a crit failure is nasty on something spamable...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This ability is really weirdly written.
First, it has the Incapacitation trait, which means that if the enemy is higher level than you and you just hit with the attack you actually miss as the level of success is reduced also on attacks.
Then, there is nothing stating you have to hit...
In my opinion, there shouldn't be this sentence: "Make a melee Strike against a foe." If you remove it, the ability works fine. But currently, there are 2 independent effects both affected by Incapacitation tag, this is nowhere to be seen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, it means that. But it's the first time I see an effect with the Incapacitation tag and a Strike. In general, when there's a Strike involved, the Incapacitation tag is limited to a portion of the effect and doesn't include the Strike.
Yes, it means that. But it's the first time I see an effect with the Incapacitation tag and a Strike. In general, when there's a Strike involved, the Incapacitation tag is limited to a portion of the effect and doesn't include the Strike.
Far as I can tell, incapacitation per the rules only applies on saving throws. So just the fort save has the incap effect.
And as soon as I say that I remember Sleeper Hold. So who knows?
Guess I need to wait for the Errata.. I am the GM of this particular game and one of my players is very excited for this ability.. But I am dreading him replacing all of his strikes with this and stunning out every normal enemy (Some guy on reddit did the math and its like 80% chance to stun if you spam, with a 10% chance to completely remove their turn on a crit fail).
Just give it the flourish trait. Make it once per rage if you think it's still too strong? Also it definitely appears not to deal any damage by the way it's written, but I can see it argued other ways.
Just make sure you communicate clearly with this player before they learn it and try to use it.
Yes, it means that. But it's the first time I see an effect with the Incapacitation tag and a Strike. In general, when there's a Strike involved, the Incapacitation tag is limited to a portion of the effect and doesn't include the Strike.Far as I can tell, incapacitation per the rules only applies on saving throws. So just the fort save has the incap effect.
And as soon as I say that I remember Sleeper Hold. So who knows?
Incapacitation definitely applies to non-saves. From the rules text of the ability
...or the result of any check the spellcaster made to incapacitate them as one degree of success worse.
Thanks! Thought I might be totally crazy, turns out I was right about that part.
It is really really good yeah. One thing I would point to is Stunning Fist, which only triggers on flurry but that's usually the flurry that can actually hit people anyway, and it is a level 1 feat.
That said, this feat also has the anti casting components. It is a little unclear if they have a 50% chance of not being able to shout for back up or if being raspy and hard to understand precludes that, but punching people in the throat becomes a really awesome infiltration tool either way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stunning was a good point of comparison for this - but that is tied specifically to your flurry. Where this just says 'you should never use a strike again'
That seems like a strange argument since any one-action feat (unburdened by Open, Press, etc.) would qualify if it gives a Strike + bonus.
Arguably, every martial should aim toward a build where the only normal Strikes they take are from Haste (though that's hard for some classes).Not saying the feat isn't powerful. It is powerful. As written, you can critically fail your attack and still have a chance of stunning your opponent. That's horrible writing.
It almost certainly is a normal Strike (not w/ Incapacitation). And if you hit, the target attempts their Fort save (w/ Incapacitation).
Still too powerful IMO.
I think a decent comparison is Resounding Blow, also at 10th yet which gives Deafened (which IMO isn't as bad, even if it is automatic). This feat takes two actions and requires a specific weapon type. Wuh?
Who would ever take that with Silencing Strike available?
Heck, I'd be shy about taking Predator's Pounce since it'd deny me the chance to stun if I simply Stride myself (assuming I had a normal allotment of actions or Haste).
Silencing Strike IMO needs to be two-actions, much like Knockdown, etc. since the carrier effect is worth an extra action. It doesn't even have the Flourish trait.
Another comparison would be a Fighter's Debilitating Shot (10th) which is a ranged Strike/Flourish for two-actions & automatic Slow 1.
The action difference still seems too significant.