Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="takyris" data-source="post: 1106716" data-attributes="member: 5171">You can't remember who suggested it?&nbsp; I could haved sworn it was you. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Psion, care to attack my argument?&nbsp; Or is my dogmatic pandering too apologetic for you to even touch?&nbsp; I mean, I understand WHY it has gotten a lot of bad press -- it takes a few feats to be useful.&nbsp; However, once you put those feats into it, you can be forcing saves about half the time you successfully hit a person of your level or lower -- and even if they make those saves, they lose their next turn.&nbsp; It's not as cool as a rogue's sneak attack, no, but if you use it as part of a team strategy, your big bruiser can keep somebody dazed more than half the time (even assuming successful saves) while the rest of the party finishes them off.I mean, martial arts isn't cool until you pop three or four feats into it, either.&nbsp; A pistol is unlikely to force a massive damage check unless you pump some feats into it (Double Tap or Burst Fire, each of which has pre-reqs).&nbsp; The difference between those and nonlethal damage is that nonlethal damage does NOTHING unless you pump those feats into it, at least for unarmed PCs (monsters might have a high-enough strength to overcome the hindrances, and a PC with a three-sectional staff just needs to take a -4 to do 1d10 nonlethal damage per strike, plus strength and so on).&nbsp; Perhaps that's why it generates so much antagonism.&nbsp; They might have been better off from a PR standpoint making nonlethal damage not even available unless you took Brawl...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="takyris, post: 1106716, member: 5171"] You can't remember who suggested it? I could haved sworn it was you. :) Psion, care to attack my argument? Or is my dogmatic pandering too apologetic for you to even touch? I mean, I understand WHY it has gotten a lot of bad press -- it takes a few feats to be useful. However, once you put those feats into it, you can be forcing saves about half the time you successfully hit a person of your level or lower -- and even if they make those saves, they lose their next turn. It's not as cool as a rogue's sneak attack, no, but if you use it as part of a team strategy, your big bruiser can keep somebody dazed more than half the time (even assuming successful saves) while the rest of the party finishes them off. I mean, martial arts isn't cool until you pop three or four feats into it, either. A pistol is unlikely to force a massive damage check unless you pump some feats into it (Double Tap or Burst Fire, each of which has pre-reqs). The difference between those and nonlethal damage is that nonlethal damage does NOTHING unless you pump those feats into it, at least for unarmed PCs (monsters might have a high-enough strength to overcome the hindrances, and a PC with a three-sectional staff just needs to take a -4 to do 1d10 nonlethal damage per strike, plus strength and so on). Perhaps that's why it generates so much antagonism. They might have been better off from a PR standpoint making nonlethal damage not even available unless you took Brawl... [/QUOTE]

Verification