Path of War now out! What do you like?

[Shinken]

I can't find it anywhere in the book where it says that using an associated weapon group increases your DC. Can someone help me?

[Snowbluff]

I can't find it anywhere in the book where it says that using an associated weapon group increases your DC. Can someone help me?

A link for the rule in the PFSRD would be nice, too.

[squiggit]

I can't find it anywhere in the book where it says that using an associated weapon group increases your DC. Can someone help me?

Page 33 under the "Saving Throw" header. Top Right corner of the page, right above the bolded "Negates".

Maneuvers performed with a favored weapon for the martial abilities’ discipline gain a +2 competence bonus to the DC of the maneuver initiated (if applicable).

[Greenish]

System and Use, under Saving Throws, page 33.

[Edit]: Alas, I have been stalkered. Or stalked?

[Shinken]

Ah, I couldn't find it because it says "favored weapon" instead of "associated weapon group" or "discipline weapon". It's something to fix, isn't it?

EDIT: Here it is, Snow. Look for "favored weapon".

System and Use, under Saving Throws, page 33.

[Edit]: Alas, I have been stalkered. Or stalked?

The official stance of the Warders Should Have Been Called Wardens club is 'stalkered' but I think 'stalked' works as well.

[squiggit]

Ah, I couldn't find it because it says "favored weapon" instead of "associated weapon group" or "discipline weapon". It's something to fix, isn't it?

Yeah. I tried searching for discipline weapon and couldn't find it. So I ended up searching for DC and eventually dug it out.

[master4sword]

My players leveled up tonight, and two of them nabbed Martial Training, one going Black Seraph and one going Veiled Moon. Since the book wasn't released* when our game started, I allowed them to retrain into new content freely at levelup, so the Antipaladin traded out a feat he wasn't using for Martial Training I and picked up MT II as his levelup feat. And we promptly noticed a nice bit of synergy between Black Seraph's Glare and Channel Negative Energy.

Disciples of the Black Seraph know that half the battle is won through the mind, and by attacking his opponent's mind with fear, he can goad him to make mistakes and shatter his resolve and confidence. While in this stance, the disciple may make Intimidate checks to demoralize foes as a free action, but only against those that he has damaged that turn. He gains a +4 profane bonus (see Intimidate skill description for details) to these Intimidate checks.

The Antipaladin can walk into a crowd, hit them with channeled energy, and demoralize them all for free, all with a solid +17 Intimidate thanks to a +5 ring looted a couple of sessions ago.

*They were allowed to use playtest content, but other than Deadly Agility, they decided to wait until release.

[Shinken]

The Antipaladin can walk into a crowd, hit them with channeled energy, and demoralize them all for free, all with a solid +17 Intimidate thanks to a +5 ring looted a couple of sessions ago.

Like I mentioned in the other thread, since Black Seraph's Glare is a free action, he can also basically take 20 in demoralize checks.

[Sith_Happens]

Like I mentioned in the other thread, since Black Seraph's Glare is a free action, he can also basically take 20 in demoralize checks.

1. Import Imperious Command feat.
2. ???
3. Profit.

[Elfkin_King]

I noticed in the Dragon Fury PrC it says that they get new maneuvers learned every ODD level, but in the table it's every EVEN level. It also says he gains a new stance at 3rd level, but neglects to mention 8th level (which is shown on the table).
Which is correct?
Odd/Even levels?
Stance at 8th, or not?

I want to assume that the table bit is correct, at least for the most part. I'm thinking that they forgot to add in the description for the 8th stance, and that the maneuvers should be ODD, not even (as they are on the table) but I don't know.

[Ilorin Lorati]

It's probably every even, and at 3rd and 8th, as that's what all the other PrCs do.

[Elricaltovilla]

Another one of my guides rears its ugly head!

[EisenKreutzer]

I just noticed that the Bloody Fangs martial tradition seems to be able to "turn off" a creatures regeneration permanently simply by being near it. I'm going to assume this effect is supposed to have a duration of some sort?

[Ilorin Lorati]

I don't see a problem here. It's an exceptionally strong ability, but their oath isn't going to jive well with most parties.

[Snowbluff]

I just noticed that the Bloody Fangs martial tradition seems to be able to "turn off" a creatures regeneration permanently simply by being near it. I'm going to assume this effect is supposed to have a duration of some sort?

Presumably it should only work while you stay near them.

I don't see a problem here. It's an exceptionally strong ability, but their oath isn't going to jive well with most parties.

Grod's Law.

[Ilorin Lorati]

I don't think it's a bad mechanic, despite. :p

[EisenKreutzer]

I don't think it's a bad mechanic, despite. :p

You don't think permanently removing an opponents regeneration is bad? The ability does not specify a range or a duration, or even a trigger. It just happens. If anyone with regeneration meets a Bloody Fang, they will lose regeneration for ever.

[master4sword]

You don't think permanently removing an opponents regeneration is bad? The ability does not specify a range or a duration, or even a trigger. It just happens. If anyone with regeneration meets a Bloody Fang, they will lose regeneration for ever.

I read it as your attacks always counting as as the thing that shuts off regeneration, the way fire or acid stops a troll from regenerating, etc.

causes regeneration to cease functioning for those creatures if they have that ability.

The creature's descriptive text describes the types of damage that cause the regeneration to cease functioning.

Emphasis mine, but to me it reads as "the bloody fang's attacks always shut down the target's regeneration for a round".

[EisenKreutzer]

I read it as your attacks always counting as as the thing that shuts off regeneration, the way fire or acid stops a troll from regenerating, etc. Emphasis mine, but to me it reads as "the bloody fang's attacks always shut down the target's regeneration for a round".

I think your reading is correct, and "cease functioning" appears to be a rules-term rather than just flavourful text.

Still, the wording on the ability is very vague:

[...] Fangs ignore damage reduction possessed
by aberrations, constructs, humanoids, monstrous
humanoids, oozes, and outsiders (except outsiders
with the elemental subtype) and causes regeneration
to cease functioning for those creatures if they have
that ability.

[Ilorin Lorati]

A small editing mistake doesn't a bad mechanic make, or Tome of Battle wouldn't be near as popular as it is in 3.5 circles. Basically, it sounds to me like what m4s said; at most, it's "shuts down regeneration for all creatures in the encounter", which is no more egregious a mechanic than anything else in the ToB/PoW toolkits; it's just a single tool being removed from a box for the DM.

[EisenKreutzer]

A small editing mistake doesn't a bad mechanic make, or Tome of Battle wouldn't be near as popular as it is in 3.5 circles. Basically, it sounds to me like what m4s said; at most, it's "shuts down regeneration for all creatures in the encounter", which is no more egregious a mechanic than anything else in the ToB/PoW toolkits; it's just a single tool being removed from a box for the DM.

Never said it was a bad mechanic, I just thought the wording was a bit too vague, and opened up for abuse. But, as master4sword pointed out, "cease to function" is a technical term, not just colorful language. So it's all good.

[Lord_Gareth]

Definitely meant to say that their attacks are what cause the regen to stop, yes - similar to using fire on a troll. My bad on the wording >.<

[Ilorin Lorati]

*snip*

That part was in response to Snowbluff's comment on Grod's Law more than anything else.

[Shinken]

A small editing mistake doesn't a bad mechanic make, or Tome of Battle wouldn't be near as popular as it is in 3.5 circles. Basically, it sounds to me like what m4s said; at most, it's "shuts down regeneration for all creatures in the encounter", which is no more egregious a mechanic than anything else in the ToB/PoW toolkits; it's just a single tool being removed from a box for the DM.

Actually, that sounds like a very bad mechanic, when you put it like that. This is not adding cool stuf, it's removing cool stuff and reducing variety. For little to no cost, even.

[Ilorin Lorati]

I don't find effects like regeneration and incorporeality to be a compelling mechanic at all. They boil down to either "you're prepared for it" or "you're not prepared for it", unlike most other effects which also include "you can edge around it even if you're not prepared for it". All this does is turn "you're prepared for it" into a passive effect for regeneration.

Keep in mind that they still have to hit, which is a trivial task only if encounter and creature mechanics allow it to be.

[Sartharina]

Keep in mind that they still have to hit, which is a trivial task only if encounter and creature mechanics allow it to be.

If you can't hit it, you're not gonna kill it anyway, regeneration or no.

[Psyren]

Well, the designer clarified the intent, so I think we can put this one to bed, no?

[Ilorin Lorati]

You're no fun, Psyren. :< Fine, fine.

[Togath]

Just noticed that the srd and pdf seem to conflict on the steelfist commando warlord archetype.
The srd lists them as gaining a bonus feat as well as improved unarmed strike at first level, but the pdf only lists them gaining improved unarmed strike.

[Ninjaxenomorph]

So, would you guys say that a class like the Magus could do well taking the Martial Training feats?