Rational for Second Printing changes.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

One wonders if the Martial Artist and Monk will be adjusted to compensate since they tend to rely more on Unarmed attacks than most characters.

No, no adjustment has been given.

[Desertpuma]

no adjustment has been given  ... yet

[Crafty_Pat]

Since this isn't actually errata for the Second Printing (at least I don't think it is) I decided to create a new thread where we could ask about the rational for changes.

Fair warning - we won't always be answering these. Sometimes it's best to just let rules speak for themselves.

Mine is in "Special Construction: Clay": what's the rational for clay have a vulnerability to fire damage?

Heat does subdual damage, which constructs are immune to.  Making it fire avoids having to have a special exemption in either the subdual rules or the feat.   Oven level heat probably deserves to be fire damage anyway.

Bingo!

Why is it that, whenever I read your posts, I get the impression of some wise old sensei who is giving out nuggets of wisdom to weary travelers who have come a long way just to ask him their questions?

Because he is. Despite his low post count Blankbeard is consistently helpful.

And for that, we at Crafty Games thank him.

[Crafty_Pat]

There's been a noticeable attempt to keep unarmed damage fairly consistantly small (hence size not affecting it). But against that, these feats work better with natural attacks (which are classed as unarmed attacks), enhancing any natural increase in their threat ranges (old version gave a 19-20 thr range, which didn't stack with the 19-20 of natural attack II; this feat does stack), and doing increased guaranteed damage instead of increasing speculative maximums.

All intentional. These changes also bring martial arts more in line with weapon and other damages throughout the game.

They're basically better than the 1st printing versions

When we were creating characters for an upcoming campaign, the fact that all 6 characters wanted to take the pre-errata Martial Arts showed that, if not broken, it was still significantly more powerful than it should have been. I think the errataed version did a great job of balancing things between Martial Arts and Master's Art.

Why, thank you.

One wonders if the Martial Artist and Monk will be adjusted to compensate since they tend to rely more on Unarmed attacks than most characters.

They were not changed and there are no plans to change them at this time. Damage dice are not the only gauge of relevance for an attack, and the Martial Artist and Monk do very well with their many, many other options already.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

Fair warning - we won't always be answering these. Sometimes it's best to just let rules speak for themselves.

In this case I needed to know if there was something besides the conceptual issue that I was missing.  I got that answered.

[TheAuldGrump]

Anyone else understand the rationale for nerfing Martial Arts and Master's Art? ... they were fine as is.

Actually, I don't think they were nerfed at all- just rebalanced. In fact, while Martial Arts got a tad weaker, Master's Art got stronger. 1d4+2 and 1d4+4 are better, on average, than 1d6 and 1d10. (4.5 vs 3.5 and 6.5 vs 5.5), so once you've taken both feats, you actually wind up a little stronger, with no real loss except a 2 lower maximum damage (compensated by the 4 higher minimum).

A quick correction - a single die does not have an average, it is only in aggregate that dice have averages. In other words, on 2d6 there are a lot more ways to roll a 7 than to roll a 12 or a 2.

A single die has a mean, but is just as likely to roll a 1 as a 4 or a 6. (And just plain can't roll a 3.5 at all....) And this chance remains the same every time that it is rolled. The odds of flipping an evenly weighted coin 7 times and getting heads every time is pretty darned low, but each flip is still a 50/50 chance, the eighth flip has just as good a chance of coming up heads as the first one.

That said - a 1d4+2 has a 1 in 4 chance of getting a 6, but no chance at all of getting a 1. Yeah, the mean is higher.

Sorry, for some reason that kind of thing bothers me in a  manner all out of proportion to its importance. 

The Auld Grump

[Deral]

Anyone else understand the rationale for nerfing Martial Arts and Master's Art? ... they were fine as is.

Actually, I don't think they were nerfed at all- just rebalanced. In fact, while Martial Arts got a tad weaker, Master's Art got stronger. 1d4+2 and 1d4+4 are better, on average, than 1d6 and 1d10. (4.5 vs 3.5 and 6.5 vs 5.5), so once you've taken both feats, you actually wind up a little stronger, with no real loss except a 2 lower maximum damage (compensated by the 4 higher minimum).

A quick correction - a single die does not have an average, it is only in aggregate that dice have averages. In other words, on 2d6 there are a lot more ways to roll a 7 than to roll a 12 or a 2.

A single die has a mean, but is just as likely to roll a 1 as a 4 or a 6. (And just plain can't roll a 3.5 at all....) And this chance remains the same every time that it is rolled. The odds of flipping an evenly weighted coin 7 times and getting heads every time is pretty darned low, but each flip is still a 50/50 chance, the eighth flip has just as good a chance of coming up heads as the first one.

That said - a 1d4+2 has a 1 in 4 chance of getting a 6, but no chance at all of getting a 1. Yeah, the mean is higher.

Sorry, for some reason that kind of thing bothers me in a  manner all out of proportion to its importance. 

The Auld Grump

What I was referring to was a career average, an easy misunderstanding.

[pawsplay]

A quick correction - a single die does not have an average, it is only in aggregate that dice have averages.

It does, it has several, in fact. It has a mean and arithmetic average (which happen to be the same due to the even distribution), but lacks a mode.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

But part of the change may be that the feat now adds damage to natural attacks (considered unarmed) rather than previously only giving a new form of natural attack.  I think somewhere it's been said that Beasts now only use their natural attacks and don't have unarmed, meaning the add is better for them.

[blackheart]

Of course, if you want to get your unborn clay golem glazed, well, that's a whole 'nuther feat. 

Or a voyage into the dark corners of golem porn. 

And Gentry FTW.

[Gentry]

I'll be here all week.

[Crafty_Alex]

Anyone else understand the rationale for nerfing Martial Arts and Master's Art? ... they were fine as is.

Actually, I don't think they were nerfed at all- just rebalanced. In fact, while Martial Arts got a tad weaker, Master's Art got stronger. 1d4+2 and 1d4+4 are better, on average, than 1d6 and 1d10. (4.5 vs 3.5 and 6.5 vs 5.5), so once you've taken both feats, you actually wind up a little stronger, with no real loss except a 2 lower maximum damage (compensated by the 4 higher minimum).

This. The frontloading of pre-errata Martial Arts to have 6 different effects (1: die increase; 2: threat range increase; 3: attack bonus substitution; 4: damage bonus substitution; 5: initiative bonus substitution; 6: Defense bonus substitution), without a prerequisite weirdly made Master's Art a "dump feat." Putting the prerequisite brakes on the feat fits other methods we've used in the past for substitution (see Practice Makes Perfect stat-subbing tricks), the changes make an unarmed fighter more reliably damaging in combat, and there's no more confusion about how both interlock with natural attacks.

EDIT: Corrected UBB Tag Fail

[prototype00]

Anyone else understand the rationale for nerfing Martial Arts and Master's Art? ... they were fine as is.

Actually, I don't think they were nerfed at all- just rebalanced. In fact, while Martial Arts got a tad weaker, Master's Art got stronger. 1d4+2 and 1d4+4 are better, on average, than 1d6 and 1d10. (4.5 vs 3.5 and 6.5 vs 5.5), so once you've taken both feats, you actually wind up a little stronger, with no real loss except a 2 lower maximum damage (compensated by the 4 higher minimum).

This. The frontloading of pre-errata Martial Arts to have 6 different effects (1: die increase; 2: threat range increase; 3: attack bonus substitution; 4: damage bonus substitution; 5: initiative bonus substitution; 6: Defense bonus substitution), without a prerequisite weirdly made Master's Art a "dump feat." Putting the prerequisite brakes on the feat fits other methods we've used in the past for substitution (see Practice Makes Perfect stat-subbing tricks), the changes make an unarmed fighter more reliably damaging in combat, and there's no more confusion about how both interlock with natural attacks.

Speaking of unarmed attacks and natural attacks, is it still the case that when a particular unarmed trick says you use your "unarmed damage" for damage calculation (such as the piledriver trick from wrestling supremacy), that unarmed damage is from the basic 1d4 + stat unarmed attack everyone gets and not natural attacks? But when a feat refers to an unarmed attack this can be either the 1d4 generic unarmed attack or a natural attack?  I must admit that is the part that confused me the most about 1st printing FC.

prototype00

[Crafty_Pat]

Speaking of unarmed attacks and natural attacks, is it still the case that when a particular unarmed trick says you use your "unarmed damage" for damage calculation (such as the piledriver trick from wrestling supremacy), that unarmed damage is from the basic 1d4 + stat unarmed attack everyone gets and not natural attacks? But when a feat refers to an unarmed attack this can be either the 1d4 generic unarmed attack or a natural attack?  I must admit that is the part that confused me the most about 1st printing FC.

The question of which base damage to use with unarmed and natural attacks, as well as what tricks, feat abilities, and other character options apply to which, is being intentionally left up to the GM to decide on a case-by-case basis. In many cases it will be obvious (Martial Arts obviously applies to unarmed attacks), but in other cases it gets dicey. (Should a drake be able to apply Martial Arts to a Bite? It really depends on the nature of the setting, story, action, and frankly, the GM's preference and/or tolerance.)

[Sletchman]

I'm curious why the Tinker spells heal xd8 + Y, rather then a static number like the cure spells?