|
6 years ago ::
May 08, 2007 - 11:37AM
#41
|
Date Joined:
Mar 25, 2001
|
Again, how is this an error? They wrote a feat, they were even forward thinking enough to consider what would happen if you somehow got more than one stunning fist attack in the same round, this is good open design. There doesn't even need to be rapid stunning for this to be a good idea, it's thinking that the possibility of more than one stunning fist in a round isn't out of the realm of possibility (and in this case, there is a way to do it) so they should cover what happens. I also see no reason to make rapid stunning a prerequisite for the feat as it sounds like it has absolutely nothing to do with hitting someone with a stunning fist more than once, but that the feat was written well enough to clearly cover what happens if you did use that feat.
For that matter, without seeing the rules, is it just as possible for it to be another opponent delivering a stunning fist (with the same feat)?
Apparently, you don't understand the meaning of "error".
The feat, without Rapid Stunning provided, is a MAJOR error. Go open up the PHB I'm sure you own, open up to Stunning Fist, and read the darn feat again. You can only make ONE
see it?
ONE stun attack per round.
I have Drow of the Underdark in my hands. I've had it for over a week now. According to Paralyzing Fists, if you hit an opponent in the SAME round with 2 successful stunning fists, the opponent has to make an additional Fortitude save or find himself paralyzed for 1d2 rounds instead. The DC is (10 + 1/2 character level + Wisdom modifier + 1 per successful stun in the same round).
This is completely contradictory to the statement on Stunning Fist in PHB. You simply CANNOT make more than one stunning attack in a round. Nor does Paralyzing Fists state that you can or allow it as an additional feat benefit. It's a simple fix, really, they need to simple re-word it or add Rapid Stunning as a prerequisite, a feat that GRANTS you the ability to make more than one stun attack in a round.
We have to assume not everyone owns Complete Warrior and knows about Rapid Stunning. Therefore, to those people, the feat is an ERROR. It needs to either be fixed, reworded, or they need to slap on Rapid Stunning as a prerequisite.
Now do you get it?! 
I'll repeat it again: the owners of this book who do not own Complete Warrior will furrow their brows and say "Huh?" because these are the same people who've probably read the PHB inside and out and know you can't make more than one stun attack per round since the group most likely would've had about a dozen monk players in their games. To these folks, it is an error. It's still an error to those who own Complete Warrior, such as myself, because no matter what, the fact remains that you CANNOT make more than one stun attack per round UNLESS you have an ability to do so.
And, according to my knowledge and thanks to the 80+ 3E WotC books I own, there's only ONE place you can ignore that restriction, and that's from Rapid Stunning. There's no prestige class, spell, or feat that allows you to do so otherwise.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
May 08, 2007 - 11:54AM
#42
|
|
|
Apparently, you don't understand the meaning of "error".
The feat, without Rapid Stunning provided, is a MAJOR error. Go open up the PHB I'm sure you own, open up to Stunning Fist, and read the darn feat again. You can only make ONE
see it?
No, apparently you don't understand. Yes, according to the PHB you can only make 1 stunning fist attempt per round. However, is there a method which allows you to make more than one stunning fist? Why yes there is. Does paralysing fists work if you only make 1 stunning fist attempt in a round? I don't have the book but from what I've heard yes it does. Does this mean it must be prevented from having a greater effect if you are somehow able to make more than one stunning fist attempt? No. As I mentioned before, even if there was no current method for gaining more than one stunning fist attempt it's still good design to indicate what would happen if you could because in the future there might be a method, this is called making your material forward compatible. There is no assumption of you having CW or any other feat that allows more than one stunning fist attempt in a round, the feat works without that material, it is simply enhanced if you have that material (and take advantage of it). The only way I could see it being an error would be if it required that you make more than 1 stunning fist hit in the round to gain the effect in which case it should have rapid stunning as a prerequisite.
And again, you also haven't answered my question on if 2 drow with the feat could each deliver a single paralysing fist in the same round (I don't have the book)?
This is completely contradictory to the statement on Stunning Fist in PHB. You simply CANNOT make more than one stunning attack in a round. Nor does Paralyzing Fists state that you can or allow it as an additional feat benefit. It's a simple fix, really, they need to simple re-word it or add Rapid Stunning as a prerequisite, a feat that GRANTS you the ability to make more than one stun attack in a round.
No it isn't, the feat works, and has a specified effect, if you hit once. It has an additional effect if you do have the ability to make more than one stunning fist attempt, which does exist through at leas 1 method in the game, and there are quite possibly more, or the possibility of more in the future. Again, this is good design as it leaves the feat open to work with other material that might not even be created yet.
We have to assume not everyone owns Complete Warrior and knows about Rapid Stunning. Therefore, to those people, the feat is an ERROR. It needs to either be fixed, reworded, or they need to slap on Rapid Stunning as a prerequisite.
Now do you get it?!
Again, the feat assumes nothing about CW, the feat works without it. There's no requirement of hitting more than once (just an increased effect) so rapid stunning should not be a prerequisite (which would then assume ownership of CW for that matter).
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
May 08, 2007 - 12:05PM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Aug 16, 2001
|
No it isn't, the feat works, and has a specified effect, if you hit once. It has an additional effect if you do have the ability to make more than one stunning fist attempt, which does exist through at leas 1 method in the game, and there are quite possibly more, or the possibility of more in the future. Again, this is good design as it leaves the feat open to work with other material that might not even be created yet.
Exactly. It's good design to take into account things that might exist elsewhere. Rapid Stunning is just one example. This isn't an error.
John Ling
Freelance Writer/Editor
PM for availability
VCL for General Gaming and play-by-post groups
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
May 08, 2007 - 12:45PM
#44
|
Date Joined:
Apr 25, 2004
|
Apparently, you don't understand the meaning of "error".
Ditto; unless the feat provides absolutely no benefit if you don't hit someone more often than once per round with 'Stunning Fist'. Which of course nobody on these boards can tell, unless they own the book, as well.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
May 08, 2007 - 1:01PM
#45
|
|
|
Ditto; unless the feat provides absolutely no benefit if you don't hit someone more often than once per round with 'Stunning Fist'. Which of course nobody on these boards can tell, unless they own the book, as well.
As far as I can tell from what Razz has said it provides 1 effect from a single hit and if you hit more than once with a stunning fist in the same round it's another save vs. a greater effect. Without knowing the exact wording of the feat I can't say if it would work with a team up situation or has to be the same attacker delivering the stunning fists.
Edit: at worst this is simply something that's not as clear as it could be, it's certainly not an error if it works the way Razz has described it.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
May 08, 2007 - 1:57PM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Mar 25, 2001
|
No, apparently you don't understand. Yes, according to the PHB you can only make 1 stunning fist attempt per round. However, is there a method which allows you to make more than one stunning fist? Why yes there is. Does paralysing fists work if you only make 1 stunning fist attempt in a round? I don't have the book but from what I've heard yes it does. Does this mean it must be prevented from having a greater effect if you are somehow able to make more than one stunning fist attempt? No. As I mentioned before, even if there was no current method for gaining more than one stunning fist attempt it's still good design to indicate what would happen if you could because in the future there might be a method, this is called making your material forward compatible. There is no assumption of you having CW or any other feat that allows more than one stunning fist attempt in a round, the feat works without that material, it is simply enhanced if you have that material (and take advantage of it). The only way I could see it being an error would be if it required that you make more than 1 stunning fist hit in the round to gain the effect in which case it should have rapid stunning as a prerequisite.
And again, you also haven't answered my question on if 2 drow with the feat could each deliver a single paralysing fist in the same round (I don't have the book)?
No it isn't, the feat works, and has a specified effect, if you hit once. It has an additional effect if you do have the ability to make more than one stunning fist attempt, which does exist through at leas 1 method in the game, and there are quite possibly more, or the possibility of more in the future. Again, this is good design as it leaves the feat open to work with other material that might not even be created yet.
Again, the feat assumes nothing about CW, the feat works without it. There's no requirement of hitting more than once (just an increased effect) so rapid stunning should not be a prerequisite (which would then assume ownership of CW for that matter).
So you're telling me that the authors wrote the feat thinking,"Well, let's throw this one feat in here just in case someone has Complete Warrior."
Are you kidding me? WotC does not, and has not, produced material that required you to have material from a non-core book unless they specifically tell you and if it's obvious. Good example is throwing in 4 psionic powers in a book, you obviously need the psionics handbook.
I don't see "Please have access to Complete Warrior to use this feat" or "We may come out with future material allowing you to use this feat. Until then, just stare at the feat until such an ability comes along in your game."
And you're presumptious on the feat's wording. You have to strike the opponent with two stunning fists in the same round. It doesn't say if the opponent is strike twice from different stunning attacks. Maybe it's implied, but when I get home in about half an hour I will write out verbatim the whole feat for everyone to see and we'll continue from there.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
May 08, 2007 - 2:23PM
#47
|
Date Joined:
Mar 25, 2001
|
Here it is, what we've all been waiting for:
Page 51, Drow of the Underdark
PARALYZING FISTS
You can make multiple unarmed attacks to paralyze an opponent in a single round.
Prerequisite: Wis 15, Improved Unarmed Strike, Stunning Fist
Benefit: When two or more of your Stunning Fist attacks succeed in stunning a single foe in the same round, that creature must make another Fortitude saving throw (DC 10 + 1/2 your character level + your Wisdom modifier +1 for each successful Stunning Fist attack). On a failure, that creature is paralyzed for 1d2 rounds instead of being stunned for 1 round. Creatures that are not subject to extra damage from critical hits and creatures that are immune to stunning cannot be paralyzed in this manner.
Special: A fighter can select Paralyzing Fists as a fighter bonus feat.
Boo yah! Take that! :P
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
May 08, 2007 - 2:29PM
#48
|
Date Joined:
Aug 16, 2001
|
I concede.  However, I will point out that your first post doesn't say you have to strike twice in one round; it says if you strike twice in one round it has more severe consequences. And, that said, I still don't think the errata should add Rapid Stunning as a pre-req, because then this feat sucks badly for somebody who gains a similar effect - through a prestige class, for example. Instead, the errata should (in my opinion), reprint Rapid Stunning and say it was intended to be included but left out by accident.
John Ling
Freelance Writer/Editor
PM for availability
VCL for General Gaming and play-by-post groups
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
May 08, 2007 - 2:52PM
#49
|
Date Joined:
Mar 25, 2001
|
I concede.
However, I will point out that your first post doesn't say you have to strike twice in one round; it says if you strike twice in one round it has more severe consequences.
And, that said, I still don't think the errata should add Rapid Stunning as a pre-req, because then this feat sucks badly for somebody who gains a similar effect - through a prestige class, for example. Instead, the errata should (in my opinion), reprint Rapid Stunning and say it was intended to be included but left out by accident.
I agree.
Also, this feat would've made sense if there were a PrC in the book that had such an ability. But there isn't. 
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
May 08, 2007 - 3:21PM
#50
|
Date Joined:
Aug 16, 2001
|
Also, this feat would've made sense if there were a PrC in the book that had such an ability.
I had that thought, actually - that would make some sense, too.
Anyway, leaving it open ended but reprinting Rapid Stunning keeps the feat more flexible.
John Ling
Freelance Writer/Editor
PM for availability
VCL for General Gaming and play-by-post groups
|
|
|
