For the bazillionth time, a thread about Critical Specialization of Hammers and Flails

[SandersonTavares]

So, I won't pretend that I'm the first or 80th person to talk about this, but after experiencing it live throughout a whole campaign, I legit think adding more voices to the chorus of people asking for errata is a good thing.

If for whatever reason you're not convinced, I'll echo some classic points about these effects:

1)They allow characters with Attacks of Opportunity to Pronelock an enemy, a kind of cheap strategy that even Paizo themselves have said, with regards to Stand Still and some reaction timings, that is NOT their intention.

2)Every single critical specializtion effect in the game that occurs without saving throws has very minor but strategic effects, like shoving them one or two squares, making them flat-footed (something that can be accomplished by flanking as well, so not very valuable in some cases but clutch in certain party makeups). Every one that does something that eats up actions, like making them slowed or stunned has a saving throw. The halfway point would be bows, which immobilize, costing an action, sure, but it's a mostly optional action most of the time, and doesn't hinder the creature's defensive or offensive capabilities, only their positioning.

The aberration that is flail/hammer crit spec screws all that over. Making an enemy prone means automatically making them flat-footed (which, as swords demonstrate, is fair without a save) WHILE ALSO giving them a -2 penalty on all melee attacks and depriving them of any movement actions other than standing or crawling. And with the way reactions work, any attempt at standing up may lead to the pronelock.

Anyway, this is, admittedly, an old issue that has been beaten to death, but much like some changes took a while to come on the recent erratas, I can only hope Paizo has not completely closed their minds off to the idea of errataing this to need a saving throw.

And yes, it's a very simple house rule, but PFS exists and some groups really like to use the rules as they stand, which mostly works fine.

TL;DR: Please Paizo make Crit Spec for Flail/Hammer require a saving throw. The idea that knocking someone prone (and being able to keep them there if you have AoO) is as weak/strong as just making them flat-footed or shoving them 5 feet is insane.

[YuriP]

I agree that's very strange these prone critical specialization are strangely good when compared to other critical specialization effects but I'm not 100% agree that's this pronelock machine.
OK, it's easier to reprone an opponent while it's getting up and triggering an AoO specially for fighters but you still need to crit to do this and even fighters with a good critical rate isn't guaranted also even if proned again a AoO prone isn't that effective once the opponent can simply getting up again after you used your reaction.

IMO my main problem isn't about prone critical effect being able to be this good but the fact that the many other critical specialization efects requires saves.

I personally like that critical specialization auto-hit without checks. This speed up the rolls outside of automated VTTs and also make's critical more critical! But I agree that in this currently situation we have some unbalances between critical effets.

[Gortle]

I'd rather see the critical specalisation effects of other weapons increased. Having to do extra checks is not something we should be encouraging in the game.

The whole prone AoO combination is a moderate part of the game. But both sides have to buy into it. Raise your Shield, Crawl away, then stand up. If you get prone on the AoO for moving it doesn't matter. Or just attack while prone. If you are going to trigger an AoO it may not even be worth trying.

If anything I'd prefer to reduce the number of classes that get AoO, by adding more reaction options in class.

Anyway I like the variety of PF2 weapons. It is so much better than other games of this type. Many of the choices are real.

[Ascalaphus]

I don't think it's quite as high-success that it's truly prone-lock, but I would want to see improvements:

- It should be more equal to other crit specializations. Considering how much you pay for in feats to get crit specializations if they're not native to your class, maybe it's the other crit specializations that should be boosted an inch, or made slightly cheaper. (It would be nice if the L5 ancestry weapon feats didn't require the L1 ancestry weapon feats, since martials like magi don't always get much from the L1 ones.)

- Due to the odd rule about reactions to move actions that don't leave a square, Stand Still can't prevent someone from standing up, but hammer/flail crits can knock someone down again. That's an irritating difference. This should be fixed somehow so hammers can't keep you down.

[HumbleGamer]

Never had many issues with the critical specialization, mostly because critical hits are rare, unless the character is a fighter or the target is a mook ( -1/-2 lvl ).

Consider that intelligent beings, knowing the enemies have AoO, would at leaest consider not to stand ( in order not to trigger AoO and, eventually, lose the action because of another critical hit ).

What's left is the flat footed condition ( which can be achieved in several way, so it's not a big deal being flat footed because prone ) and the -2 circ on attacks ( that's more sensible ).

Assuming a standard group ( blaster, healer, skillmonkey, frontline ), there will only be one with hammer critical specializaiton, so it's not a big deal.

If your players are exploiting some mechanic, try seting your monsters to do exactly the same.

They mass spam Hammers because AoO ( 3 fighters + healer, for example )?
Make enemies using hammers to.

They exploit getting BM on each character?
Same

They all go with scare to death?
Give it to enemies too.

Paizo can't deal with how players try to exploit the system, and the best they can do is to offer some overall balance ( most of the times ).

The fact hammers/flails are good is true.
No doubt about it.

The fact every character goes fighter with hammers/flails, is not paizo's fault, to say one. I'd try to first explain this to my players ( if I were in a similar situation ), and then I'll put them against what they are playing, just to see if it is fun.

ps: luckily, I never had similar issues in my groups in my whole life ( though sometimes there was some overall way too strong build that messed with both the party and adventure balance ).

[Baarogue]

>Raise your Shield, Crawl away, then stand up
ftfy

It really is easy for a fighter to crit so there's not much that can be done about that side of things, especially not at PFS games. One of the problems I've observed (and am combatting) is that GMs are forgetting or just don't know that the target is no longer flat-footed from prone when they stand, so they mistakenly give the AoO that much better odds to crit again

But another problem is poor creature design in modules. I played a session of Fist of the Ruby Phoenix last weekend wherein my party was challenged by twin monks. My GM does know they aren't flat-footed from prone when they stand, but I was shocked to learn they were written without Kip Up, and so our members with AoO were able to smack them again when they stood up from Knockdown. I am disappoint. This of course can be fixed at home games but at PFS games we're at the mercy of the author

[Mer_]

Pronelocking isn't absolute until you invest a lot into it.
Even if an AOO puts you back down, you have now exhausted the reaction and can stand up without problem. Additional reactions are high level feats. Not to mention, AOO only have the option of disrupting/putting you down again on a crit.
A crit isn't unlikely on a fighter but it's also an expression of the class's features.
Are the shield shove reaction feats combined with a reach weapon too strong for the same reason?

[Plane]

Gortle wrote:

I'd rather see the critical specalisation effects of other weapons increased. Having to do extra checks is not something we should be encouraging in the game.

...
Anyway I like the variety of PF2 weapons. It is so much better than other games of this type. Many of the choices are real.

It's not the extra checks so much for me, though I like fewer rolls, but I agree. I'd rather see stronger effects. As was mentioned, sword inflicting FF is niche useful but mostly made irrelevant by flanking.

This gives me ideas for a class feat that let's you upgrade your critical effect with more options. Spear's clumsy condition is excellent. Switching your sword to clumsy on piercing attacks for example could be a fun option.

Good discussion, bazillionth time.

[PossibleCabbage]

I mean the basic thing preventing a "pronelock" situation is that the fighter's odds of critting on a strike against a credible opponent are not that great.

When it comes to less than credible opponents, well... it's far from a problem if the PCs can ROFLSTOMP them.

[Squiggit]

I mean yeah it's not going to happen constantly, but it's still a significant benefit added to an already significant event, in a way that's noticeably disproportionate compared to other similar outcomes.

Like yeah it might not be a big deal for a fighter to 'roflstomp' weak enemies, but it does feel a little bad when that's something specific to hammer wielding fighters that sword or knife or club wielding ones don't have access too, especially when it does not appear to something general weapon balance takes into consideration much.

[Ascalaphus]

Yeah, I don't think we need to reduce the crit frequency of fighters. Critting is fun.

But evening out the crit effects of different weapons would be good. The prone thing is just a lot stronger than "save to maybe lose an action" or "push someone away from you so you can't even do your follow-up attack".

[YuriP]

Ascalaphus wrote:

"push someone away from you so you can't even do your follow-up attack".

These forced movement critical effects are just bad.

[Ravingdork]

Baarogue wrote:

One of the problems I've observed (and am combatting) is that GMs are forgetting or just don't know that the target is no longer flat-footed from prone when they stand, so they mistakenly give the AoO that much better odds to crit again.

Got any sort of rules citation for that? I'm going to need more evidence than your say so.

It seems to me that if the action gets interrupted, they don't gain any of it's benefits.

[Errenor]

Ravingdork wrote:

Baarogue wrote:

One of the problems I've observed (and am combatting) is that GMs are forgetting or just don't know that the target is no longer flat-footed from prone when they stand, so they mistakenly give the AoO that much better odds to crit again.

Got any sort of rules citation for that? I'm going to need more evidence than your say so.

It seems to me that if the action gets interrupted, they don't gain any of it's benefits.

Could you start finding it yourself from time to time? You are not a novice here and rules are open to all.

Here:
If you use a move action but don’t move out of a square, the trigger instead happens at the end of that action or ability.
Standing up ends the prone condition.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

An easy way to fix this would be to implement a Reflex (or Fortitude) Save onto the Hammer/Flail Specializations equal to the Class DC (since the Sling, Brawling, and Firearm have saves for Stunned/Slowed 1, and being knocked prone is approximately the same thing, but perhaps worse). Maybe even implementing the size requirements for "tripping," meaning they can't be a Small creature with a Flickmace knocking a Huge (or bigger) creature prone, so it's not usable against the biggest/toughest of creatures (without investment, of course). It's far less intrusive and quicker to errata, so this would be the conservative way to make it more fair.

A more progressive way to fix this would be to just remove the saves from the ones that already have it, and maybe buff up some of the other ones, like the Knife and Dart specialization instead adding additional dice instead of flat modifiers for its bleed (because 1D6+4 is extremely weak in the higher levels), and making the forced movement ones an optional benefit, while instead providing a secondary benefit if it's ignored, with effects with low DCs (like the Bow specialization) instead also scaling to Class DC. Some other ones, like Bomb, Shield, or Sword, would need another pass with differing effects (because Bomb can actually be worse on a critical than better).

[Arachnofiend]

If you add a class DC saving throw the hammer specialization goes from the best crit spec to the worst immediately. I got enough crits on my gunslinger to know that firearms functionally do not have a crit spec.

[Squiggit]

Arachnofiend wrote:

If you add a class DC saving throw the hammer specialization goes from the best crit spec to the worst immediately.

Even with a save it would still be leagues better than sword or shield or knife/dart past low levels.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

Arachnofiend wrote:

If you add a class DC saving throw the hammer specialization goes from the best crit spec to the worst immediately. I got enough crits on my gunslinger to know that firearms functionally do not have a crit spec.

I mean, I did say it would be the easy way to fix it, which by and far means it's the more conservative fix. Never said it was the right way to fix it, which would require an entire overhaul of the other critical specializations.

[Ravingdork]

Errenor wrote:

Could you start finding it yourself from time to time? You are not a novice here and rules are open to all.

It is true that I am not a novice, and sometimes am even already aware of the answers, but many people visiting these boards are novices--especially in light of the recent OGL migration--which is why I still insist upon it. People generally should get in the habit of citing their sources and linking game elements for ease of reference as a matter of courtesy to others.

Thank you for the source links. :)

[Errenor]

Ravingdork wrote:

It is true that I am not a novice, and sometimes am even already aware of the answers, but many people visiting these boards are novices--especially in light of the recent OGL migration--which is why I still insist upon it. People generally should get in the habit of citing their sources and linking game elements for ease of reference as a matter of courtesy to others.

Thank you for the source links. :)

You could have said exactly this instead of implying Baarogue just made the rule up. This is a solid motivation. Oh well.

[arcady]

If a player has spent half their allotment of level up abilities on pursuing a one trick pony... is the right response to nerf that one-trick, or to just add in an enemy that attacks at range every so often - while mostly letting the player enjoy their absurd level of hyper focused specialization.

*******************************

On the rules citation... maybe I'm just old or something, but when I went to school back in the 1700s it sometimes seems - we were told to cite our sources for a claim.

( https://www.scribbr.com/category/citing-sources/ ) ;)

Sure, we're not doing academic writing. But if you telling someone that 'the rule for X is Y', you should expect to not be believed until you tell them where in Z that comes from.

We're on the Internet after all, and linking to things is the whole point of this.

( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypertext ) ;)

Maybe that isn't always needed, but if someone then actually asks where in Z that claim came from, it's easy and best to just supply it...

[Baarogue]

arcady wrote:

If a player has spent half their allotment of level up abilities on pursuing a one trick pony... is the right response to nerf that one-trick, or to just add in an enemy that attacks at range every so often - while mostly letting the player enjoy their absurd level of hyper focused specialization.

*******************************

On the rules citation... maybe I'm just old or something, but when I went to school back in the 1700s it sometimes seems - we were told to cite our sources for a claim.

( https://www.scribbr.com/category/citing-sources/ ) ;)

Sure, we're not doing academic writing. But if you telling someone that 'the rule for X is Y', you should expect to not be believed until you tell them where in Z that comes from.

We're on the Internet after all, and linking to things is the whole point of this.

( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypertext ) ;)

Maybe that isn't always needed, but if someone then actually asks where in Z that claim came from, it's easy and best to just supply it...

Thanks for the not-smug-at-all advice. Oh, and an age-rank-pull snuck in there as well. Smooth. Some context for you that might assist in understanding mine and perhaps some others' frustration (though I cannot speak for them, only observe their reactions) with Ravingdork's interrogation and response, as if he's the authority trying to help us learn to cite instead of just asking a dumb question in a hostile tone and then backpedaling when confronted. I referred to those rules as if they were known because they were being argued and cited, by me in fact as well as others (many of whom are in this thread) in two other threads recently, one of which Ravingdork posted in and so presumably read. For him to suggest I was making it up was beyond ridiculous, but I would still have "cited my sources" when I saw his post if Errenor had not taken care of it before I could. I might not have been as nice about it though

[SandersonTavares]

I don't really think people understand how easy it is to pronelock even on-level/level+1 enemies. You guys are acting as if the flail/hammer guy is playing alone, and not in a game with things like crushing runes, heroism, inspire courage, synesthesia, fear spells, hero points, true strikes etc.

[YuriP]

Rise from Your Grave!

[MrCharisma]

YuriP wrote:

Rise from Your Grave!

Oh man that takes me back!

[Ezekieru]

In response to this question:

“But honestly pf2 is so great it's hardly a grievance. I was just expecting a hammer/flail nerf to come up in the panel haha”

Answered from Michael Sayre on Discord:

"Huh, yeah, I wonder if I added a save to those to make them align better with the other crit specs? Guess we'll have to wait and see."

[Red Griffyn]

To Baarogue & Errenor. Thank you for the citation. This was what was in my brain but someone asked me to prove it in game time and couldn't find the relevant text/interaction on AON. It is bookmarked for my next session.

Independent of who the ask is from or the optics way being asked, just know I humbly appreciate you/the folks who do provide those citations. Its hard to have discussions on the Paizo forums or PF2e subreddit as many assert as truth various claims that are usually not really substantiated.

More importantly for in game rulings on the fly I google search something and quickly scan the top 2-3 threads until I can spend more time doing research out of game. Even for someone like myself that intuitively knows the rules/interaction and has a decent understanding of the system, the step by step/holding my hand comes in handy for keeping the game moving along with minor or no interruptions!

[Kyle_TheBuilder]

And I will opposing what was said here: if not for prone crit spec on hammer/flails... I couldn't care less about crit spec in game as a mechanic. To be fair, without hammer/flails crits they could remove crit spec mechanic and nobody would notice. 1d6 bleeding? Moving creature 5ft from you? Clumsy 1 where even at low-mid levels you can easy stack frightened 1+, clumsy 2+ etc. on enemy (and it doesn't stack with frightened so it rarely gets value) and greater Crushing Rune can already do better than this? Flat-footed when you have bazillions ways to make enemies flat-footed again so this spec is useless half the time when you crit? Litte extra damage on crit from pick spec? Yeah, it's okish but only becasue it's good with grevious rune and pretty much only Fighters care about Picks. Slow 1/Stunned 1 with save so not only RNG for crit first but then RNG for save, and it's Fort on top which is usually the highest save so it means it does nothing to stronger enemies 8/10 times on top of having to crit first? Hammer/Flails seem too strong becasue other crit specs are way too weak to make difference in combat. When someone at our table crit with hammer/flail it has impact, it does something, it can turn the tide, it matters, it creates something (like AoA trigger), it removes enemy action. Rest of the weapons? Please.

I would rather make all other crit spec better. Give Spears Clumsy 2 on crit, give Polearms for example ignoring 5 resistance to physical damage on crits etc. Give crit specs something good becasue once hammer/flails are nerfed I will probably just forget I even have crit spec on weapon becasue they are wet noodles.

I fully expect that they will add save to hammer/flails in Remaster, which will mean with their already lower damage dice (which was becasue they had such good crit spec) everyone will just switch to Guisarme 24h.