Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="W'rkncacnter" data-source="post: 9315010" data-attributes="member: 7033455">there's at least a couple of maneuvers (shrug it off and unstoppable from adamant mountain) that let you ignore or mitigate certain conditions, yeah.yeah, the damage negation doesn't care if it's an AoE or not, but the ability to add your shield's AC bonus to the save does.i mean, you have the right to say an object is damaged (or has a chance to be damaged) whenever you want as the narrator.sometimes people want to navigate around a creature. sometimes people want to retreat. sometimes you kill an enemy with your first attack and want to use your second.power word stun is an 8th level spell and is (as a power word) HP dependent. it can also only ever effect 1 creature. it also does, in a way, have a built in condition chain, since it rattles creatures above the HP threshold instead of stunning them. it also doesn't do damage.5th level spell that can only effect one creature and doesn't do damage. also, the stun is dependent on taking damage - it's not immediate.7th level spell with a casting time long enough to be useless to cast in a combat. also, each creature only needs to save once.7th level, and somehow even more HP dependent then power word stun.this is an o5e only spell so i don't think it's relevant, but it's also a NINTH LEVEL SPELL, so even if it were an a5e spell i'd be baffled that you put it here.legendary magic item worth 60,000 gp and with a set save DC of 17 (almost certainly lower then your maneuver/spell save DC - whichever is higher - by the time you get it), and also you can only use the stun effect up to 5 times per day and you don't even necessarily get all the uses for it back after a long rest. ALSO requires all your attunement slots (unless you're a high level artificer or a constructed paragon, in which case it only uses MOST of your attunement slots).there's a very specific set of circumstances that make stunning assault so problematic (from what's been discussed).1. it's cheap. it's EXTREMELY cheap (and harder to resist!) for a fighter that's specialized in it. because it's so cheap, you can use it basically every round. all the effects above are either high level spells (requiring high level slots) or, in the case of the hammer, an extremely rare and expensive magical item.2. you can pick it up as early as 5th level, whereas the earliest you can grab any of the spells listed above is 13th. there's no guarantee the hammer will even exist in any given campaign.3. you can spread your attacks to stun multiple creatures, OR force a single creature to save against it multiple times, depending on what you need (and how often you can hit, to be fair), all in a single turn. only the hammer can do this, but its uses per day are significantly more limited then stunning assault.in short, stunning assault really isn't like any of these other effects you've listed. that's why you can justify a condition chain for it without it having broader implications - the chain is a balancing factor.like...i guess you could add condition chains to other places. like if you want to make lower level effects that could potentially build up to very staggering conditions. but you don't really need to, and none of the effects you've tried to counter with really (in my view) justify having a condition chain (i mean sheesh, imagine a 9th level spell that induced rattled on a healthy creature that FAILED the save. actual garbage).also, i think there's monsters that use the slowed -> restrained -> petrified chain already, or at least something similar.creatures tend to have higher CON scores as they get larger, so in my view this is largely a concern that addresses itself.</blockquote>

Verification