Ask your GM. It has been discussed in the past but to my knowledge with no real result.
I personally would let them stack. Getting both takes at least 3 feats and Grab + 2*STR damage is probably still worse than what a fighter can pull off with Combat Grab at level 2.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think they do. And for the feat investment, I think they should.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I see no reason why they wouldn't stack. They aren't the same effect, so no issue with duplicate effects, and as Blave mentioned, Combat Grab is still probably better. Actually, for late game play (bit earlier with Free Archetype) seeing a character with all 3 could be neat. A super grappler type with Thrash and what have you.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The bonus type is not disclosed, both feats are nowhere near mirrors of each other AND they have different classes altogether. I don't see why they wouldn't. Sounds like a perfectly reasonable class synergy for me.
|
When you make a Melee Strike, you add your Str modifier to damage. This is just adding that same modifier as damage on something that's not a Strike, but still an Attack. Since the ability doesn't normally do damage, it's worded differently than "Add your strength modifier to damage" like similar things. By the method you have it, becoming Enfeebled 1 will only reduce the total damage by 1 rather than by 2 like it should in that instance, which in my book is just too good to be true.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why would it be by 2 if both feats are modifying one roll?
It's almost like applying this penalty to the STR portion of the Barb's damage, the weapon portion and the rage portion.
To me, the cost steep enough and the return low enough that it wouldn't break anything. Solid damage? Yes. But this sounds to me like someone spending their feats to specialize in combat maneuvers and making them more efficient, not something that breaks the amount of damage done.
We're looking at what? 8 (STR 18| +4) to 14 (STR 24|+7 with Apex) damage on a successful grapple? Not that big of deal.
It's also just two passives triggering off of the same action. Unlike free actions, there's no limit on passives as far as a I know.
If any player at my table wanted to make this kind of specialized investment, I would happily allow it.
|
|
Why would it be by 2 if both feats are modifying one roll?
It's almost like applying this penalty to the STR portion of the Barb's damage, the weapon portion and the rage portion.
To me, the cost steep enough and the return low enough that it wouldn't break anything. Solid damage? Yes. But this sounds to me like someone spending their feats to specialize in combat maneuvers and making them more efficient, not something that breaks the amount of damage done.
We're looking at what? 8 (STR 18| +4) to 14 (STR 24|+7 with Apex) damage on a successful grapple? Not that big of deal.
It's also just two passives triggering off of the same action. Unlike free actions, there's no limit on passives as far as a I know.
If any player at my table wanted to make this kind of specialized investment, I would happily allow it.
Here's some counter points in no order because I'm tired.
1. Being able to automatically deal any amount of damage without rolling is a "big deal". Assurance at level 15 is a 33, or a +30 if you roll and are focused on Athletics. The best fort DCs I saw at that level were around 37, with the worst being 33.
2. Enfeebled applies to all Str based things, it's essentially a penalty to your Str mod. It should function exactly the same as if your str mod were reduced by the value. So if you have +4 Str and get Enfeebled 4, you shouldn't be able to do damage with the abilities. Actually now that I think about it, even if they do stack, they're still technically separate instances of damage so Enfeebled would apply to both of them and they actually would do nothing... But I digress.
3.You are agreeing that Enfeebled would lower the damage, which makes it strength based damage. Therefore you can't add your strength twice to the damage.
4. Again, the wording is as it is because you are dealing damage with something that normally doesn't deal damage. You can't say "this adds your str mod to damage" when there's no damage being dealt. The way its worded is the only way it would make sense that you are now dealing a flat amount of damage in every success.
5. Your arguments are basically boiled down to "Its not your Str mod, it's a value equal to your Str mod! It's totally different!" Well they aren't different, it's just a different wording to mean the same thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Therefore you can't add your strength twice to the damage.
I can't actually find a rule to this effect, can you show me where it is?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why would it be by 2 if both feats are modifying one roll?
It's almost like applying this penalty to the STR portion of the Barb's damage, the weapon portion and the rage portion.
To me, the cost steep enough and the return low enough that it wouldn't break anything. Solid damage? Yes. But this sounds to me like someone spending their feats to specialize in combat maneuvers and making them more efficient, not something that breaks the amount of damage done.
We're looking at what? 8 (STR 18| +4) to 14 (STR 24|+7 with Apex) damage on a successful grapple? Not that big of deal.
It's also just two passives triggering off of the same action. Unlike free actions, there's no limit on passives as far as a I know.
If any player at my table wanted to make this kind of specialized investment, I would happily allow it.
Here's some counter points in no order because I'm tired.
1. Being able to automatically deal any amount of damage without rolling is a "big deal". Assurance at level 15 is a 33, or a +30 if you roll and are focused on Athletics. The best fort DCs I saw at that level were around 37, with the worst being 33.
2. Enfeebled applies to all Str based things, it's essentially a penalty to your Str mod. It should function exactly the same as if your str mod were reduced by the value. So if you have +4 Str and get Enfeebled 4, you shouldn't be able to do damage with the abilities. Actually now that I think about it, even if they do stack, they're still technically separate instances of damage so Enfeebled would apply to both of them and they actually would do nothing... But I digress.
3.You are agreeing that Enfeebled would lower the damage, which makes it strength based damage. Therefore you can't add your strength twice to the damage.
4. Again, the wording is as it is because you are dealing damage with something that normally doesn't deal damage. You can't say "this adds your str mod to damage" when there's no damage being dealt. The way its worded...
My argument is just saying that both feats are different from each other and belong to different classes, and because of that they stack. If both feats were the same, then they wouldn't be able to be chosen once you picked one or the other. Also, this is not guaranteed damage, they still require a success, like any kind of attack (which all maneuvers are, I might add), so the enfeebled condition would penalize the attack roll by X and the damage reduction would be exactly X once. There's no "two instances of damage". You strength is being counted twice and this is your whole dmg bonus, your argument, on the other hand, is saying that when someone makes a STR roll with the enfeebled X it takes the X penalty to the attack roll and then you must break down each source of your damage and apply the X to each source, which doesn't happen.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No my argument is that "damage equal to your strength modifier" is the exact same thing as adding your str mod to damage of a strike. The "type" of damage is from the ability modifier, and you can't add the same "type" of something twice. It's not called a bonus because ability modifiers aren't bonuses, but you still can't add the same modifier to the same "roll" twice.
Essentially how this feat changes the action is that it adds the Damage rules to it. There is no damage die, so we don't roll. We then add our Ability Modifier as normal. Then we add anything that increases damage from bonuses we have. This works exactly the same as Daze , which has the exact same wording of "damage equal to your modifier".
In fact, my finding of the wording in Daze just proves my point. You're arguing that if you had an ability that adds your Spellcasting Modifier as damage to your spells it would work on Daze, making it do double damage. But what happens when it starts rolling dice instead? Would you still add your modifier to a roll of 1d6+Mod?
The point about rolling, I was pointing out that you could auto succeed against some equal level creatures at level 15, and that you had a better than average chance to succeed on grappling even the creatures with the best Fort saves. Compared to Striking, skills scale at a much better rate since you can become legendary by level 15. There are also feats that help make your actions better, or reduce the degree of failure, ect.
The digression thought I had in my last post wouldn't work anyway, like I said I was tired. If it were two instances of damage you would be able to knock someone to dying two from a normal success of a single action, or bypass things like Ferocity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. Being able to automatically deal any amount of damage without rolling is a "big deal". Assurance at level 15 is a 33, or a +30 if you roll and are focused on Athletics. The best fort DCs I saw at that level were around 37, with the worst being 33.
So you can use assurance to grab TWO out of 26 level 15 creatures. That's really nowhere near being a big deal. And if you roll the check, you mess up your MAP. I really don't see the issue.
Even with Furious Grab you still psend an action to deal like 10 damage. Against creatures that have around 300 HP on average. All that for no less than three class feats.
And if you still think it's too much:
One could argue that the damage of both feats isn't combined. So it's not STR*2, but STR damage dealt twice. I'm reasonably sure resistance to budgeoning damage is much more common than weakness. Even more so if you consider that - to the best of my knowledge - a Grab is never magical or made from any special material. So that 10 damage is likely to do next to nothing against a huge number of creatures.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No my argument is that "damage equal to your strength modifier" is the exact same thing as adding your str mod to damage of a strike. The "type" of damage is from the ability modifier, and you can't add the same "type" of something twice. It's not called a bonus because ability modifiers aren't bonuses, but you still can't add the same modifier to the same "roll" twice.
Why exactly? I don't see a rule that states that you can only add an ability score to "something" once.
Essentially how this feat changes the action is that it adds the Damage rules to it. There is no damage die, so we don't roll. We then add our Ability Modifier as normal. Then we add anything that increases damage from bonuses we have. This works exactly the same as Daze , which has the exact same wording of "damage equal to your modifier".
Yes, you should refer to the Damage section to resolve the damage from both abilities. Since both abilities give damage in a fixed amount, equal to your Strength Modifier, you aren't actually adding a modifier directly. You are adding together 2 fixed amounts of damage and applying them.
This is no different than the following example: You have 2 instances of fixed persistent damage, say fire and acid from bombs. One does 4 and the other does 2 damage for arguments sake. This means that at the end of your turn you would take 6 total damage, split between the two damage types.
In fact, my finding of the wording in Daze just proves my point. You're arguing that if you had an ability that adds your Spellcasting Modifier as damage to your spells it would work on Daze, making it do double damage. But what happens when it starts rolling dice instead? Would you still add your modifier to a roll of 1d6+Mod?
Again, you aren't directly adding a modifier. Both abilities do a fixed amount of damage equal to your Strength modifier. There is a difference. Daze specifically adds your Modifier to it's damage roll in the same way that a melee strike adds your Strength modifier (usually, though some abilities may change that). Both Crushing Grab and Brutal Bully give you the ability to deal a fixed amount of damage equal to your Strength Modifier. So the two situations are not the same, or even related.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not to mention you need to spend an action to rage first. It's not just feat costs.