|
Did one inch punch reintroduce vital striking to 2e or am I misreading it? It was good (in an extremely boring mathfixing way) in 1e, particularly for power attackers. One inch punch: https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=1742 But I haven't actually played 2e, so is trading iteratives and movement for a single bigger hit still good? And is it scaling right?
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 02:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 07:21 |
|
|
2013 lurker rereg posted:Did one inch punch reintroduce vital striking to 2e or am I misreading it? It was good (in an extremely boring mathfixing way) in 1e, particularly for power attackers. if you mean "attack that takes more actions but adds more damage die" that's all over the place in 2e
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 02:47
|
|
|
The extra dice are also multiplied on crit, which I do not think was the case in 1E. So, yeah, it's pretty good. It competes with Flurry of Blows and Stunning Strike, though, so it's not a slam dunk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 02:48
|
|
|
2013 lurker rereg posted:Did one inch punch reintroduce vital striking to 2e or am I misreading it? It was good (in an extremely boring mathfixing way) in 1e, particularly for power attackers. Note that attackers in general get more damage dice now. Magic weapons get more damage dice on roughly the same scale as well (and monks can apply the same enchantments, called runes, to their unarmed attacks.) It seems to scale about right but it's difficult to call it definitely more damage because a second punch is also going to have more than one damage die. e: yeah, by level 6 your unarmed strikes should be dealing two dice of damage each according to standard magic item progression.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 02:52
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:The extra dice are also multiplied on crit, which I do not think was the case in 1E. So, yeah, it's pretty good. It competes with Flurry of Blows and Stunning Strike, though, so it's not a slam dunk. tbf stunning strike is completely unreliable on anything higher level than you, while damage is always going to be damage
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 02:54
|
|
|
Let's take it to the absurd. Level 19 Monk with One-Inch Punch and +3 Major Striking Handwraps of Mighty Blows. 1d6 base + 3d6 from magic = 4d6 + Str + 6 from Greater Weapon Specialization (Master) per hit. 3 actions means a potential of 12d6+18 +3x Str mod, but also the potential or more misses or criticals. A One-Inch Punch adds 6 extra weapon damage dice at 18th level so +6d6, or 10d6+6+Str mod damage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 02:55
|
|
|
Kvantum posted:Let's take it to the absurd. Level 19 Monk with One-Inch Punch and +3 Major Striking Handwraps of Mighty Blows. Strength is solvable for the math hypothetical too. Assume they're a Strength monk, so 18 at character creation+3 ability boosts+an apex item puts them at 23 Str for a +6 bonus. This would increase to 24 and +7 next level with the fourth boost.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 03:00
|
|
|
Monk gets Flurry of Blows, so their first action is two attacks, for four attacks per turn.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 03:00
|
|
|
Kvantum posted:Let's take it to the absurd. Level 19 Monk with One-Inch Punch and +3 Major Striking Handwraps of Mighty Blows. This isn't really a great comparison without going into attack values, because all of the damage from OIP would be landing at full attack, where a monk going all in with 4 attacks (thanks to flurry) is stacking up some substantial MAP on the 2nd-4th attacks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 03:26
|
|
|
Slab Squatthrust posted:This isn't really a great comparison without going into attack values, because all of the damage from OIP would be landing at full attack, where a monk going all in with 4 attacks (thanks to flurry) is stacking up some substantial MAP on the 2nd-4th attacks. that's called out in the post though? you do get damage more reliably but less damage/less chances of a huge spike of damage with a critical hit. it's not a perfect simulation, but it's a good illustration of the tradeoffs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 03:29
|
|
|
I should apparently go to bed because I completely missed that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 03:58
|
|
|
Kvantum posted:Let's take it to the absurd. Level 19 Monk with One-Inch Punch and +3 Major Striking Handwraps of Mighty Blows. Assuming you are using 3 damaging property runes on your handwraps (not uncommon), that's an extra 3d6 per hit, and we aren't even considering Forceful/Backstabber from stances. With the bare minimum of 18 STR, you are looking at: One Inch Punch: 13d6+10 3xStrike: 21d6+30 2xStrike+Flurry: 28d6+34 2xStrike+Flurry+Ki Strike: 34d6+34 Even with just doing a single flurry + Ki Strike, you are looking at s strikes of 10d6+10, the first at +1, the second at -3, for a total of 20d6+20. That's almost certainly better than a full round One Inch Punch and you still have 2 actions before and/or after. (And, it still triggers Stunning Strike.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 05:59
|
|
|
I feel like the issue is that there are situations where multiple attacks are generally a bad idea (unless you're a fighter). Like, for instance, fighting a higher level enemy that is almost for sure going to have a better AC, and in those cases you're better off getting off one solid hit with all the bonuses you can get instead of flurrying and introducing more failure points into your damage output Anyway finally sitting down and reading the APG. Investigator seems cool as Hell and both ratfolk and kobold are making a real solid run at leshy's title of my favorite ancestry in the game. Blockhouse fucked around with this message at 12:59 on Aug 1, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 12:34
|
|
|
So the thing about Pathfinder 2e is, its all about team work, but its nice to have a solo plan as well. The best thing about being a Monk is, with your one action Flurry you can dance in and out of melee if you want, or you can always be positioning yourself for flank to help out the other melee. Whereas One Inch Punch is mostly for when you are stuck in melee and just want to hit once really hard*. Currently my PFS Monk is approaching level 6, he's human, 1st Wolf Stance/Rain of Embers Stance, 2nd Student of Perfection Archetype, 4th Stand Still and planning on grabbing Wolf Drag at 6. The usual gameplan is Round One, 1) Enter Wolf Stance, 2) Move to position, 3) Flurry of Blows, then its Move for flank, Flurry and maybe cast Shield for my third action on subsequent rounds. From level 6 on round 2, if they try to move away, reaction attack from Stand Still, if they don't its Wolf Drag, Flurry of Blows, if they try to stand up from being made prone by Wolf Drag, Stand Still reacts again. So I've wrangled an extra full accuracy attack from those shenanigans. If I wasn't doing that with my build and was often stuck in melee just flurrying and not needing to move, One Inch Punch is a decent conservative option. (Were I taking One Inch Punch, I'd definitely consider Perfect Strike from the Student of Perfection archetype. https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=901)
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 14:38
|
|
|
The other niche case that stands out for One-Inch Punch is stealth stuff, since if you're undetected via plain Stealth you can get a single attack off before your target knows where you are again. Seems like it might be useful if you're using Stealth for Initiative to get an initial big hit with any flat-footed-triggering effects.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 20:44
|
|
|
It’s fuckin cool and I support it
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2020 22:12
|
|
|
Regarding the APG, in particular the archetypes I have a question. If I take martial artist and get stumbling stance and stumbling feint, do I get to flurry of blows even as a non monk? The feint says you get to flurry, bit as a non monk I technicly don't have access to it. How would you guys rule it? I'm also really excited for the new ancestries and countless options the APG gives. Also how would you guide new players into using other combat actions other than moving and striking/spells? I kind of want them to find out themselves about demoralize, feint and recall knowledge, but feel they are stuck in simple patterns where they don't even try something different.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 07:51
|
|
|
You cannot. It says "when you use Flurry of Blows", but you don't have it.quote:Also how would you guide new players into using other combat actions other than moving and striking/spells? I kind of want them to find out themselves about demoralize, feint and recall knowledge, but feel they are stuck in simple patterns where they don't even try something different. I've generally waited for my players to just ask about "can I try doing that" and then brought up how, but one way might be to get them to describe their actions more. Cyouni fucked around with this message at 08:14 on Aug 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 07:57
|
|
|
Mise posted:Also how would you guide new players into using other combat actions other than moving and striking/spells? I kind of want them to find out themselves about demoralize, feint and recall knowledge, but feel they are stuck in simple patterns where they don't even try something different. Have enemies sometimes start using those actions on them, and make this tie into environmental conditions or player actions one way or another. For example, a room with a small pit and enemies trying to Shove them into when convenient (and then requiring use of High Jump to get out quickly), enemies using Grapple to get in the way of spellcasting (you can't use somatic components when restrained), a wacky ice rink dungeon room where both PCs and enemies have to Balance to move (put some low-level minions in so they can critically fail and get accidentally run over by the devil zamboni or stampeded through by the hobgoblin attack goalies), or a room full of greedy ghosts (use lower-level minions and slap some ghost traits on) that try to Steal/Disarm the PCs' stuff to use against them. Roadie fucked around with this message at 08:37 on Aug 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 08:35
|
|
|
Oh I like using that stuff against them to show off the flexibility of combat! And about the stumbling feint: should have read that more carefully. I was thinking that it wouldn't work but was not completely sure
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 15:50
|
|
|
I'll also note that if you have something like Ki Strike (which says you may use an unarmed attack or Flurry as part of the spell), you still can't use Flurry if you don't have it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 19:35
|
|
|
Just wanted to say the 2nd edition gamemaster guide is fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 20:18
|
|
|
So the APG introduces a familiar ability that lets it accompany you with "chirps, claps, or its own miniature instrument" when you make a Performance check, yet bards have to jump through hell of hoops to acquire a familiar at all. In my opinion this is the height of horseshit and I am now seriously reconsidering whether this edition actually is playable in any way, shape or form. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
MMAgCh posted:So the APG introduces a familiar ability that lets it accompany you with "chirps, claps, or its own miniature instrument" when you make a Performance check, yet bards have to jump through hell of hoops to acquire a familiar at all. In my opinion this is the height of horseshit and I am now seriously reconsidering whether this edition actually is playable in any way, shape or form. Familiar Master exists?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 22:23
|
|
|
MMAgCh posted:So the APG introduces a familiar ability that lets it accompany you with "chirps, claps, or its own miniature instrument" when you make a Performance check, yet bards have to jump through hell of hoops to acquire a familiar at all. In my opinion this is the height of horseshit and I am now seriously reconsidering whether this edition actually is playable in any way, shape or form. Just take the Familiar Master dedication at level 2?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 22:24
|
|
|
MMAgCh posted:So the APG introduces a familiar ability that lets it accompany you with "chirps, claps, or its own miniature instrument" when you make a Performance check, yet bards have to jump through hell of hoops to acquire a familiar at all. In my opinion this is the height of horseshit and I am now seriously reconsidering whether this edition actually is playable in any way, shape or form. Hell of Hoops:
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2020 22:43
|
|
|
Does the Hell of Hoops contain basketball devils, hoop dance devils, or both?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2020 00:46
|
|
|
So, hey, just in case anyone's interested I've been messing around with using the TiddlyWiki engine to create an in-place PF2 reference at https://github.com/hyphz/PF2TiddlyWiki It packs the whole reference into one HTML file, so it's all local and you can use it on your iOS, Android, whatever, without any internet access. But what's really nice is that TW has very strong facilities for using the content as a database, so it can actually be designed to spot interactions between rules, which it's actually done. Like, I wouldn't have spotted that Animus Mine can blow up an illusory creature that attacks the user.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2020 03:17
|
|
|
I got annoyed at 2e's stealth rules being inconsistently scattered between the conditions, the relevant actions, and sidebars, so gathered up and rewrote them for mechanical equivalence but more clarity, especially around invisibility and blindness (which no longer need special caveats everywhere). I'd be interested to hear any feedback/critiques.
Roadie fucked around with this message at 09:10 on Aug 25, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2020 22:40
|
|
|
Roadie posted:I got annoyed at 2e's stealth rules being inconsistently scattered between the conditions, the relevant actions, and sidebars, so gathered up and rewrote them for mechanical equivalence but more clarity, especially around invisibility and blindness (which no longer need special caveats everywhere). I'd be interested to hear any feedback/critiques. Other than a few grammatical errors (check the first sentence of the "Undetected" section), it looks pretty handy. Hopefully having a concise document to link for some of my friends will keep me from having to yet again explain three times in a row that sneaking up to someone and meleeing them isn't really a thing in PF2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2020 00:44
|
|
|
Vanguard Warden posted:sneaking up to someone and meleeing them isn't really a thing in PF2. Well, it's possible, but you can only get a single attack off before you're observed again, and you need to keep concealment or cover against them the whole time. The main limitation is action economy stuff: even in an ideal situation you're, at a minimum, burning an action every round to Hide again after attacking (preferably at the end of your turn, so you can be hidden from them for the miss chance).
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2020 01:31
|
|
|
That's exactly what I mean though, your attack against a target can only benefit from being Hidden or better if you are currently within circumstances under which you can Hide as you make the attack: concealment like a cloud of smoke or crouching in a bush, cover like sitting behind crates or a ledge, or just being straight up Invisible. If you want to Sneak out of cover and stab a guy in the back, the rules state that you would first spend an action to Stride up to the target and then immediately become Observed at the end of that action before you can do anything else if you don't have cover or concealment anymore standing behind the guy you're trying to stab. The only enemies you can do the Splinter Cell/Metal Gear sneak-melee thing to without just being straight up invisible have to be standing directly adjacent to a bush or something, or you need to use Create a Diversion. You're right about the action economy though, if you're a Rogue looking to get Sneak Attacks off you clearly want to go for flanking, Invisibility heightened to 4th, or any other way to keep your targets flat-footed to you for as many attacks as possible if you're trying to be optimal about it. The Investigator's Strategic Strike is much better suited to the 'sneaky archer' concept. Vanguard Warden fucked around with this message at 03:14 on Aug 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2020 02:57
|
|
|
Is the automatic concealment from being in low light good enough to Hide in?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2020 03:32
|
|
|
Vanguard Warden posted:and then immediately become Observed at the end of that action before you can do anything else if you don't have cover or concealment anymore At the start of that action, actually!  Also, light-based concealment is pretty useless on the whole because of the prevalence of low-light vision and darkvision, the closest to practical being to be either a dwarf or a shadowdancer with greater darkvision who leans hard on just spamming darkness everywhere (with the help of an ally, in the case of the dwarf). Lesser smokesticks are only 3 gp, so I suppose one could make a build centering around those, alchemist smoke bombs, the cape of the mountebank, etc, but that's still a lot of action economy pain just to get off one extra attack against flat-footed per round. I'd say the overall value in Stealth is much more in being able to become undetected pretty easily, at which point you can spend a turn in peace healing or removing debuffs or whatever. This also goes well with aggro/taunt-type mechanics like Champion's Reaction or the Swashbuckler feat Antagonize, so you can do double duty by also forcing the enemy to either attack blindly or eat a penalty. An all-Stealth party could also pull some amusing shenanigans here by scattering behind cover in the middle of a boss fight and all becoming undetected, then dropping back in with a new round of synchronized ranged attacks, given how PCs will generally have healing and debuff-removers while enemies only rarely do. blastron posted:Is the automatic concealment from being in low light good enough to Hide in? Yes, but only if the creature you're hiding from doesn't have darkvision or low-light vision. Roadie fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Aug 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2020 03:33
|
|
|
Roadie posted:At the start of that action, actually! Wha- Document posted:If you attempt a non-Strike action, or you Sneak or Step in a way that makes you not concealed against or benefiting from cover or greater cover against the creature, you become observed just before you act. Well holy poo poo, you're right. Does that mean you can't sneak from cover to cover through the open, then? Like if you Sneak to move two spaces when starting in cover, and the first space is out of cover but the second space is in cover, are you not hidden? Or is it about where you end up, and not the entire path? Vanguard Warden fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Aug 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2020 08:19
|
|
|
Vanguard Warden posted:Well holy poo poo, you're right. Does that mean you can't sneak from cover to cover through the open, then? Like if you Sneak to move two spaces when starting in cover, and the first space is out of cover but the second space is in cover, are you not hidden? Or is it about where you end up, and not the entire path? After re-reading the text of Sneak in the core book, I think the intent is that you can Sneak between different sources of cover or concealment so long as you end each movement with it in cover or concealment, so I'll adjust my text to that effect. It still leaves a pretty big ??? because you only roll based on the conditions at the end of your movement, but the condition from Sneak applies from the start of your movement, which means you now have to figure out to retroactively apply its interactions with attacks of opportunity and other reactions. Roadie fucked around with this message at 09:08 on Aug 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2020 09:01
|
|
|
Vanguard Warden posted:Wha- Where in the CRB is this? I can't find it. All I can find is stuff about the end of the action.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2020 14:58
|
|
|
Roadie posted:After re-reading the text of Sneak in the core book, I think the intent is that you can Sneak between different sources of cover or concealment so long as you end each movement with it in cover or concealment, so I'll adjust my text to that effect. Basics4Gamers Stealth video This video (basicly every video from the channel) has pretty good explanations for rules including examples
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2020 19:15
|
|
|
Mise posted:Basics4Gamers Stealth video I don't think this case actually has any explanation. Read the text for Sneak and try to figure out how, say, deciding at the end of your movement that actually you were undetected the whole time should interact with getting hit with an Attack of Opportunity in the middle of your movement. I think Paizo just didn't design the Sneak action properly. EVGA Longoria posted:Where in the CRB is this? I can't find it. All I can find is stuff about the end of the action. It's from my (initially incorrect) attempt at condensing down the stealth rules (further up the page), which I've updated to account for what seems to be the intent of using Sneak (but not anything else) to move from cover to cover without being detected. Roadie fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Aug 24, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2020 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 07:21 |
|
|
I'm at work right now, so I don't have the time to fully watch the video, but i guess the difference arises from the different states of detection (maybe?) If you successfully sneak (after becoming hidden) you become undetected and that's when you don't trigger stuff, because it looks at the end of your sneak movement. If you are just hidden you can't leave cover or concealment without becoming observed. (Please correct me if I'm wrong, potentially by shouting at me)
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2020 22:09
|
|