Dreamscarred Press - Path of War Expanded! (Thread VII)

[Extra Anchovies]

How about this:

In addition, if you attack your opponent from a higher elevation (including after jumping towards them as a move action), you may treat the attack as if it were made as part of a charge for the purposes of feats and abilities you possess that would provide a beneficial effect.

That would enable Boar's Charge, Reckless Luck, Cudgeler Style, Horn of the Criosphinx, and other charge-attack triggers, but not charge-triggers in general e.g. Coordinated Charge, pounce, etc.

Given that the whole stance is about jumping around and whatnot, it should just flat-out not provide some or all of its benefits to mounted characters.

[Geigan]

I think we've gotten to the point where we're basically either suggesting RAW in place of what's actually there or splitting some very fine hairs about what the RAW means, which is probably a good sign that the devs could take some time to re-examine this one.

Extra Anchovies also makes another good point which is that the design of the stance really doesn't seem intended to be for a mounted charger. Allowing for a specifically powerful benefit to a fairly specific combat style that wasn't possible without this stance really doesn't seem to fit considering the context of everything else around the stance's design and seems more like an unintended loophole.

I still submit that it was likely either missing some restrictions to make it clearer what applies as with Extra Anchovies' example, or that they simply meant to make it an attack action/standard action (wording it to disallow vital strike as necessary) that behaves as a charge which would only really allow some additional flexibility in triggering a charge that doesn't really allow anything that couldn't have been triggered by a standard action before (pounce, martial charge, spirited charge, other charge feats).

If the RAW were clearer I'd pick an interpretation and stick to it, but I think it's better to wait for clarification and just talk it out with one's GM to come up with a reasonable interpretation for one's build in the meantime.

[exelsisxax]

I think we've gotten to the point where we're basically either suggesting RAW in place of what's actually there or splitting some very fine hairs about what the RAW means, which is probably a good sign that the devs could take some time to re-examine this one.

Extra Anchovies also makes another good point which is that the design of the stance really doesn't seem intended to be for a mounted charger. Allowing for a specifically powerful benefit to a fairly specific combat style that wasn't possible without this stance really doesn't seem to fit considering the context of everything else around the stance's design and seems more like an unintended loophole.

I still submit that it was likely either missing some restrictions to make it clearer what applies as with Extra Anchovies' example, or that they simply meant to make it an attack action/standard action (wording it to disallow vital strike as necessary) that behaves as a charge which would only really allow some additional flexibility in triggering a charge that doesn't really allow anything that couldn't have been triggered by a standard action before (pounce, martial charge, spirited charge, other charge feats).

If the RAW were clearer I'd pick an interpretation and stick to it, but I think it's better to wait for clarification and just talk it out with one's GM to come up with a reasonable interpretation for one's build in the meantime.

RAW is very clear. It's exactly what both anchovies and I have said, no interpretation required. The thing that ISN'T RAW is your objection to it working with lances and the like.

[CasualViking]

Per PF FAQS, a mounted charge is a charge action for both mount and rider. Yes, it contradicts the CRB but it is the Lex Posterior rules of the game. Supposedly, you can have your mount charge while you yourself do something else, but it certainly wont enable any of your own charge-specific abilities.

Furthermore, the damage multiplier for lances specifically apply only to the first attack of a charge (again, per FAQ). The first FAQ also strongly implies that Spirited Charge only applies to the first attack made during a charge.

[MilleniaAntares]

Not relevant to the current topic, but I need to share this thought I had.

Mystics are wisdom based because their inner power always wants to get out. Wisdom improves their maneuvers and animus by allowing them to open the way for a bit more energy while still being able to shut it down when necessary.

A sorcerer, on the other hand, instead has their inner power wanting to remain inward. So they need charisma in order to push their power outward as spells, with greater charisma allowing more power to be released.

While not supported by mechanics much, a sorcerer will only suffer by pushing themselves too hard. After all, a sorcerer with less than 10 charisma is only somewhat different than their base, depending on their bloodline.

Whereas a total failure of a mystic is dead, as they would be consumed by their power even when they're essentially passive... perhaps manifesting as spontaneous combustion.

[Powerdork]

So a forum search didn't point me to the right place to post this, but it turns out there's a problem with the description of the locked condition in the Fool's Errand playtest: The entry doesn't actually describe the outcome of the initial save (success or failure), or at least doesn't indicate whether the following outcome is the result of a success or a failure.

[Forrestfire]

Thanks for that catch. I've updated it with the proper wording ("or become locked.") across all our docs, including the public one.

[Powerdork]

Thanks for that catch. I've updated it with the proper wording ("or become locked.") across all our docs, including the public one.

Then I worry about a recurring loop.

[oyzar]

My Google Fu is failing me again. How does thrashing dragon maneuvers that mention two wielded weapons work with unarmed strikes? Can you just use them and count your fists as weapons? This becomes even more weird when you consider Thrashing Dragon Frenzy and Thrashing Dragon Twist? Can you effectively make 6 and 3 unarmed strikes against each adjacent enemy?

I seem to remember Elricaltovilla making an unarmed Thrashing Dragon user, but I do not know if that was considering the fact that you would have to use weapons for these maneuvers/skip them entirely or because it actually do work.

I read somewhere on the dreamscarred press forums that swift claws doesn't suffer two weapon fighting penalties and hence the above mentioned maneuvers wouldn't need either. I find it rather odd that the iconic feat two weapon fighting does so little for a Thrashing Dragon user, especially considering the fact that Dervish Defender grants it and the Dragon Fury PrC require it.

I'm planning for a Hidden Blade and it seems to me like unarmed strikes is one of the better choices for the archtype at higher level, which feels really weird, since the archtype is all about drawing hidden weapons.

I'm also curious about the answer to the question about Diving Charge posed above. An official answer would help a lot more than various interpretations. I have a mounted character using those feats that could make plans to get Diving charge. Since you are very often at higher ground due to being mounted, it would be awesome(as long as the mount is larger than the enemy as per the CRB). My interpretation would be as follows:
- You get +2 hit -2 AC on all attacks on a full attack
- You get triple damage on the first attack, but not subsequent ones just as for a normal charge, though you would get the benefit of Horn of the Chrinosphinx on all attacks.
- On AoOs, Strikes or other standard actions you also get the benefit of tripple damage + Horn
- I'm probably going to end up combining it with Seize the Opportunity(pow version) and Mytic Vital Strike so each AoO does 6x/9x/12x damage. Though you already said you don't balance for mythic, so you don't need to keep this in mind.

[Sayt]

Unarmed Strikes can count as wielded weapons for two weapon fighting when two weapon fighting.

When you're reading Thrashing Dragon Maneuvers, you need to pay attention to how the maneuver instructs you to act. So if you're TWFing with your unarmed strike and you use Frenzy and Twist you mare 3 and 6 attacks each, respectively.

Swift claws is where things get a bit messy. But you don't need the two-weapon fighting feat to fight with two weapons, what the two weapon fighting feat does is allow you to reduce the to-hit penalties associated with two weapon fighting.

Swift Claws doesn't call on you to take the two weapon fighting action, it lets you make one attack action to strike twice. On the other hand, Dragon Assault calls on you to make a full attack action. If you want to use two weapons, full attack and get the bonus attacks from wielding extra weapons, you have to take the penalties, and unless you have two-weapon fighting feat, those penalties are probably gonna suck.

[oyzar]

Thanks for the answer. Neither Frenzy nor Twist asks you to do full attacks, so I guess it doesn't suffer the twf penalties, right? You could even attack with a couple of one handed weapons without problem, correct?

[Powerdork]

Or, with sufficient hands, two-handed weapons?

[TiaC]

So, I was just reading the Roil Dancer and I noticed a mistake. Ignition Surge is not necessary to get multiple attacks with a kinetic blade. The blade lasts until the end of your turn and can be used for all attacks on your turn (source). Thus, the ability doe not seem to do anything.

[Sayt]

Or, with sufficient hands, two-handed weapons?

Thanks for the answer. Neither Frenzy nor Twist asks you to do full attacks, so I guess it doesn't suffer the twf penalties, right? You could even attack with a couple of one handed weapons without problem, correct?

Well, you're limited to two weapons plus an UAS with Twist, and two attacks each with two weapons, plus an UAS.

A qsetion of my own: What prevents a character having Sanguine Perfection up more or less permanently? I recall reading that you can't have a maneuver active and prepared at the same time, but I can't find a rules cite in the book saying that you can't (I had a friend question why that couldn't be the case).

Also, when you pop Sanguine Perfection, does it affect every condition listed, or do you choose one when you activate it and it negates that one for the duration?

[Castilonium]

Well, you're limited to two weapons plus an UAS with Twist, and two attacks each with two weapons, plus an UAS.

A qsetion of my own: What prevents a character having Sanguine Perfection up more or less permanently? I recall reading that you can't have a maneuver active and prepared at the same time, but I can't find a rules cite in the book saying that you can't (I had a friend question why that couldn't be the case).

Also, when you pop Sanguine Perfection, does it affect every condition listed, or do you choose one when you activate it and it negates that one for the duration?

ErrantX says that maneuvers can be used outside of combat and automatically recover the following round. So yes, you can technically have Sanguine Perfection up indefinitely as long as you don't let its duration expire. It says it "may delay or stop a number of negative conditions," not just one. What prevents a character from having it up permanently is simple: Death. Also, it doesn't prevent you from being grappled, entangled, or pinned. It would prevent you from being helpless in those states, but you might not be able to take the actions to initiate or recover Sanguine Perfection.

[Powerdork]

Well, you're limited to two weapons plus an UAS with Twist, and two attacks each with two weapons, plus an UAS.

If you're trying to address what I said, I'd like to note: I was saying that if you have four or more hands you can use multiple two-handed weapons. There's nothing in the Combat section restricting it, and the basic penalty is the same unless your weapons also count as light for the purpose of TWF.

A qsetion of my own: What prevents a character having Sanguine Perfection up more or less permanently? I recall reading that you can't have a maneuver active and prepared at the same time, but I can't find a rules cite in the book saying that you can't (I had a friend question why that couldn't be the case).

Also, when you pop Sanguine Perfection, does it affect every condition listed, or do you choose one when you activate it and it negates that one for the duration?

Action costs, movement restrictions, or a reduction to initiation modifier, mostly, since it's tough to keep readying and re-using a maneuver that has an initiation time of "1 immediate action", as unless you're a zealot, bushi, hussar or rubato you're spending a swift, standard or full-round action on recovery. Zealot, bushi and rubato run into the problem of being unable to recover a maneuver they just used, while hussar is reliant on making the Ride check to negate an opponent's attack.

The text that specifies how many conditions the maneuver can affect is "a number of" them, so it seems to be as many as you want. One might rule that you'd have to have the condition first, but then you get into "it suppresses conditions that would deny you the chance to use this ability to suppress them". Yeah, it's a mess and we're all waiting for errata.

[amberlink]

I've seen multiple answers on this, from threads on here alone..is there an official answer to, does Initiator's Soul get advanced through Metaforge?

[exelsisxax]

I've seen multiple answers on this, from threads on here alone..is there an official answer to, does Initiator's Soul get advanced through Metaforge?

Astral Suit: At each level, treat the metaforge as if he had gained a level of aegis for the purposes of damage reduction and customization points. The metaforge does not gain any other benefits from an increased level (bonus customizations, daily uses of reconfigure, power points, etc.). This does, however, allow the metaforge to qualify for customizations dependant on his aegis level, such as the Reach customization.

You get more customization points, which you can use for more stances and maneuvers, and advances effective aegis level for the purposes of qualifying for those extra stances and maneuvers customizations. Initiator level does not advance by RAW, and you'd still be strictly limited by normal archetype max level restrictions by only Aegis level. I don't see anywhere else where it matters.

[Thealtruistorc]

Just a few questions about errata and future projects that I have. They came up at my table the other night and I was wondering if these are already being discussed.

First question is on the Bladecaster Prestige class. Are there plans to buff it in the Errata, because it feels rather weak as of right now? I envision a few things could afford to be punched up about it.

The next question is future Path of War supplement archetypes. I know that the intent is to do a lot of these better with base classes, but will we be seeing archetypes for the Cavalier, Gunslinger, Swashbuckler, and other classes? What about prestige classes, as I can envision some classics like the Hellknight and Horizon Walker gaining some interesting maneuver-based options?

[khadgar567]

Just a few questions about errata and future projects that I have. They came up at my table the other night and I was wondering if these are already being discussed.

First question is on the Bladecaster Prestige class. Are there plans to buff it in the Errata, because it feels rather weak as of right now? I envision a few things could afford to be punched up about it.

The next question is future Path of War supplement archetypes. I know that the intent is to do a lot of these better with base classes, but will we be seeing archetypes for the Cavalier, Gunslinger, Swashbuckler, and other classes? What about prestige classes, as I can envision some classics like the Hellknight and Horizon Walker gaining some interesting maneuver-based options?

there is gonna be akashic expansion but i like to see what new toys we can get and if i remember correctly i ask what types of new content you want question in this same treat.

[Da Beast]

Why doesn't the Desperado Warlord give up tactical flanker for something more relevant to a dedicated gunner? It just feels like a wasted ability on a character who's so decidedly a ranged attacker.

[exelsisxax]

Why doesn't the Desperado Warlord give up tactical flanker for something more relevant to a dedicated gunner? It just feels like a wasted ability on a character who's so decidedly a ranged attacker.

So that people can capitalize on ranged flank a whole lot. But if you don't get ranged flank, it's quite bad.

[Da Beast]

So that people can capitalize on ranged flank a whole lot. But if you don't get ranged flank, it's quite bad.

Still seems weird to get an ability at level 4 that only works in conjunction with one specific feat that the class itself does not grant and that can't be taken until level 10.

Edit: I suppose flanker's gambit is an option but the combination of maneuver design pushing warlords towards making a lot of standard action single attacks (you'll probably get this bonus on a single attack made on your next turn) and the fact that guns target touch ac to begin with makes this a pretty week bonus to spend a swift action setting up.

[upho]

Still seems weird to get an ability at level 4 that only works in conjunction with one specific feat that the class itself does not grant and that can't be taken until level 10.

Edit: I suppose flanker's gambit is an option but the combination of maneuver design pushing warlords towards making a lot of standard action single attacks (you'll probably get this bonus on a single attack made on your next turn) and the fact that guns target touch ac to begin with makes this a pretty week bonus to spend a swift action setting up.

Well, if you want to be able to get more out of Tactical Flanker, I suggest you combine Desperado with the (excellent) Privateer template and get the Sea Combat ploy. This has the added boon of also allowing you to reload your gun without needing a free hand, and Privateer is great for pistol TWF also in other respects (add Weapon Group Adaption and stuff like Broken Blade Stance if you really wanna go all in machine gun-ho). Desperado and Privateer fit quite well together in many other respects as well, in terms of both fluff and crunch.

Btw, I don't really agree maneuver design is "pushing warlords towards making a lot of standard action single attacks". I'd say this is only true for zealots, whereas other initiators often gain more from primarily using full attacks and having more counters and boosts, especially in the case of ranged builds (since they typically don't need to move nearly as much as melee builds). But I guess it may be true for a Desperado focusing hard on Tempest Gale control/debuff strikes and don't really care about damage.

[Da Beast]

Well, if you want to be able to get more out of Tactical Flanker, I suggest you combine Desperado with the (excellent) Privateer template and get the Sea Combat ploy. This has the added boon of also allowing you to reload your gun without needing a free hand, and Privateer is great for pistol TWF also in other respects (add Weapon Group Adaption and stuff like Broken Blade Stance if you really wanna go all in machine gun-ho). Desperado and Privateer fit quite well together in many other respects as well, in terms of both fluff and crunch.

I don't feel like this is an adequate answer as a shouldn't have to combine one archetype with another just to make the first one's abilities functional. Furthermore, the specific character I was trying to build when this whole thing caught my attention is supposed to be a rifle toting battlefield commander for an iron gods game so a double pistol wielding pirate doesn't really fit what I'm going for. I'm basically basing my character off of this art and don't plan on changing weapons.

Spoiler

Show

Btw, I don't really agree maneuver design is "pushing warlords towards making a lot of standard action single attacks". I'd say this is only true for zealots, whereas other initiators often gain more from primarily using full attacks and having more counters and boosts, especially in the case of ranged builds (since they typically don't need to move nearly as much as melee builds). But I guess it may be true for a Desperado focusing hard on Tempest Gale control/debuff strikes and don't really care about damage.

Warlords get to use aid another as a move action just like zealots (even if they don't get it until level 8) so they do miss out on a lot of support potential by focusing on full attacks. They also are a bit constrained on swift/immediate actions since those are also used for their maneuver recovery and ignoring strikes seems like it would really limit your ability to bring your full arsenal of maneuvers to bear in a fight. Lastly, tempest gale and solar wind, which desperados are sort of incentivised to specialize in since their version of battle prowess is locked into those disciplines, only have 4 full round action strikes between the two of them with three of those being the solar reflection line of maneuvers which would be even harder to use with some sort of flanking than a normal full attack and the forth being tempest gale's 9th level maneuver so you won't be seeing it at all for most of your character's career.

On a side note, I noticed just now that warlords normally get three battle prowess disciplines over 20 levels while desperados only get 2. Is this to balance out them getting both right away or is it an oversight? It's not a huge deal but it does seem like a bit of a bummer, especially when compared to the steelfist commando version which just applies to all stances from any discipline at any level AND adds charisma to your bonus on a very useful skill.

[oyzar]

For dervish defender, can you use armor spikes to qualify for one of the weapons for the AC bonus? If I'm wielding a quaryerstaff, I need to hold it in both hands in order to get the benefit, correct?

[exelsisxax]

For dervish defender, can you use armor spikes to qualify for one of the weapons for the AC bonus? If I'm wielding a quaryerstaff, I need to hold it in both hands in order to get the benefit, correct?

Armor spikes never help you qualify, and you must be using a quarterstaff as a double weapon to get the benefit.

[upho]

For dervish defender, can you use armor spikes to qualify for one of the weapons for the AC bonus? If I'm wielding a quaryerstaff, I need to hold it in both hands in order to get the benefit, correct?

Though exelsisxax has already answered your question, in case you're wondering the relevant part of the Two-Weapon Defense RAW is (my emphasis):

"While... ...wielding a weapon in each hand (or using a double weapon), and not using a shield heavier than a buckler, the warder may..."

And armor spikes aren't wielded in a hand.

[Da Beast]

Is sleeping goddess worth taking, through a martial tradition or something like that, on a non psionic character? I like the flavor and the maneuvers seem really cool but I'm pretty set on warlord for my next character over zealot and I'm worried the small handful of power points you get from taking discipline maneuvers won't be enough.

[exelsisxax]

Is sleeping goddess worth taking, through a martial tradition or something like that, on a non psionic character? I like the flavor and the maneuvers seem really cool but I'm pretty set on warlord for my next character over zealot and I'm worried the small handful of power points you get from taking discipline maneuvers won't be enough.

Nope. You get PP, but sleeping goddess doesn't grant you psionic focus, and you'll never get enough PP to really get as much fuel as you want. With those limitations, sleeping goddess is not good at all. Without augments, SG maneuvers are much weaker than almost every comparable maneuver from other disciplines. It's no good unless your character is fully psionic.