Maybe I'm just being nitpicky, but I like having consistency in my games. Somehow I'm bothered that in one turn someone with an 18 dex and combat reflexes can hit 4 goblins running by him, but that same character can only hit 1 of them when the same four goblins are in front of / surrounding him. At the same time, the guy who can hit all four goblins in one turn cannot hit more than 1 running by him because he does not have the combat reflexes feat regardless of what his dexterity or bab is. What's more is that while AoOs are done at Full BAB (at least I presume, maybe I'm wrong), attacking with the full attack reduces it by 5 each time.
Honestly, I suppose you are.
The way Combat Reflexes is supposed to work is that it's supposed to help melee with Crowd Control regarding Attacks of Opportunity.
With his 18 Dex, he can make up to 5 Attacks of Opportunity in a given round, since Combat Reflexes says you can make additional Attacks of Opportunity (not including the standard one you get) up to your Dexterity Modifier.
If a character has less than Base Attack Bonus +6, he can only make one attack in a given round. If he has Cleave and/or Improved/Great Cleave, he can make a "single attack" that affects multiple creatures, assuming he consecutively hits each creature.
Removing both feats out of context, he normally can only make 1 Attack of Opportunity and 1 Attack for a Full Attack Option. Combat Reflexes allow him to amplify his Attacks of Opportunity immensely.
With Cleave and its upgrades, it allows him to amplify his Attack Action(s) immensely, giving him chances to hit those creatures, all at his highest Base Attack, the same as Combat Reflexes.
Maybe I'm just being nitpicky, but I like having consistency in my games. Somehow I'm bothered that in one turn someone with an 18 dex and combat reflexes can hit 4 goblins running by him, but that same character can only hit 1 of them when the same four goblins are in front of / surrounding him. At the same time, the guy who can hit all four goblins in one turn cannot hit more than 1 running by him because he does not have the combat reflexes feat regardless of what his dexterity or bab is. What's more is that while AoOs are done at Full BAB (at least I presume, maybe I'm wrong), attacking with the full attack reduces it by 5 each time.
To quote the Core book (page 180):"An attack of opportunity is a single melee attack, and most characters can only make one per round." The exception is characters with "Combat Reflexes and Additional Attacks of Opportunity: If you have the Combat Reflexes feat, you can add yourDexterity modifier to the number of attacks of opportunity you can make in a round." (Again Core rulebook, page 180). That's pretty much it. The AoO is about making an attack against an inattentive or distracted opponent who gives you the opportunity to make a freedbie by his /her carelessness. Not making a serious attack against a prepared and weary opponent.
*edit* ninja'd by a (?) reptile. *sigh* I must be slowing down :)
It's more the feeling that an Attack of Opportunity takes no time or effort, while a normal attack takes considerable more effort and gets more difficult, despite the fact that an attack of opportunity is really only an attack outside of the character's turn.
It doesn't give the feeling that the target is more vulnerable (which would make more sense as the loss of dex to ac or something) and a warrior that can hit 4 times in one turn can't make more than AoO without a feat and some good dexterity.
I'm not talking about game balance, I'm talking about consistency. And I know how the rules work, but am I really the only one who questions why they work like that?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I may be remembering something from 3.X, but I believe somewhere in the core books it talks about how a single attack action is not meant to represent a single swing of the sword. Rather, it is lots of swinging, feinting, clashing, and one good shot at a hit. So when someone pulls of a bunch of Attacks of Opportunity from Combat Reflexes, don't think of it as them magically swinging their sword faster. Rather, it is the ability to shift around, take advantage of opportunities, and make more attacks that have a chance of hitting during a big, chaotic clash. The "time and effort" is the same, Combat Reflexes just gives a mechanical expression to the abstract ability to react more quickly to openings in opponents' defenses while still focusing on the attack more so than someone without that training.
Mort is correct. The characters are assumed to be fighting the entire time. You may roll the dice 4 times, but more than 4 swings are assumed to be taking place.
See, my problem is it's never described like that in actual gameplay. Or how do you even describe that. While that explanation works for this particular situation, it falls apart when you consider fighting an unarmed target, effects that affect one single attack, critical attacks, misses.
You've got one situation where an attack action is a multitude of attacks and defending one's self and another where it's a swift single action. And what's more, I still can't envision a situation outside the construct of a game, where a person can deal severe multiple blows, but can't take advantage of someone's vulnerability more than once in six seconds without special training.
The definition and descriptions become inconsistent for the same thing in different situations.
I've recently gotten over my brush with hit-points by using the strain-injury setup. So I guess, I'm looking for something similar with attacking.
The game is an abstraction, not a simulation, and that description was in the 3.5 DM's guide, but Paizo never copied it over. Trying to make it into a simulation only causes headaches.
How do you deal with paralyzed characters getting reflex saves?
The game is an abstraction, not a simulation, and that description was in the 3.5 DM's guide, but Paizo never copied it over. Trying to make it into a simulation only causes headaches.
First, all existing simulations are abstractions, there's no way you can recreate everything (unless you are a god with your own plane to work with).
Second, Pathfinder is a system. A system that has abstractions within it. I get it, abstractions are meant to keep things simple, so you're not getting caught up in the details.
All I'm asking for is consistent abstractions. If each of the iterative attacks is actually a series of attacks (which, btw is never mentioned or given any precedence for in the CRB), don't make rules that treat them like each is an individual attack. Take for example "cluster shot", an attack that combines all attack rolls into one to represent all the shots being fired at once. Why can't you do this with one attack (which is actually a series of attacks), why can't you take more than one attack of opportunity without special training?
How do you deal with paralyzed characters getting reflex saves?
I don't give helpless characters reflex saves; they can't react. Reflex saves are dodging or otherwise reacting to avoid danger. And yeah, I know it doesn't say specifically that helpless characters can't make reflex saves, but it doesn't say that dead characters can't move either. Besides, what kind of GM would I be if I just let the badguy that the players paralyzed make a reflex save?
The attacks we roll are just there for us(players), however it does not make sense for the "characters" to just stand there until their turn comes up, so the game assumes action is always taking place.
By the rules paralyzed characters actually get reflex saves with a -5 penalty, so it is not the same as the dead condition.
The games assumes luck is also involved. It is kind of like when you watch a movie and the hero is saved by some improbably event taking place at the right time.
The games abstractions will be inconsistent at times.
Watch The Princess Bride. There are a few fight scenes with Inigo Montoya where there really aren't any AoO. However, there is a scene where four mooks run past Inigo Montoya in a hallway and he takes 4 attacks, one on each of them (and drops them all I might add).
|
Here is how I see AoO in combat:
You are in a fight and swing at the opponent, he blocks and stabs forward you turn to avoid the stab and see someone trying to move past you, you stab out at the by passer and then turn bringing the sword back toward your main opponent. You don't know if you hit or did damage to the other guy and don't really care. Your focus is on the main opponent.
Later as part of your training (since you are always in training) you learn to expand you field of vision in a fight and improve you reflexes giving you the ability to control your sword better. Due to these two improvements you are able to see more opponents try to get by you and have the skills to take a swing at them. You are still not concerned if you hit them or do damage but you have the skills to do so.
I don't know if that helps but that is how I see it. Personally I think there should be penalties to AoO's due to the fact you are swinging at a moving target while in a fight but that is a personal feeling.
All I'm asking for is consistent abstractions. If each of the iterative attacks is actually a series of attacks (which, btw is never mentioned or given any precedence for in the CRB), don't make rules that treat them like each is an individual attack. Take for example "cluster shot", an attack that combines all attack rolls into one to represent all the shots being fired at once. Why can't you do this with one attack (which is actually a series of attacks), why can't you take more than one attack of opportunity without special training?
The explanation of multiple attempts / one attack was prior to 3E iirc. They had one *minute* rounds with only one attack roll prior to 3E. There was never really a satisfactory explanation for the one roll / one minute round except to manage time in game. The norm in 3E is one attack in a six second round, with an AoO happening if your enemy gets sloppy / distracted. It's far more reasonable in terms of "real life" actions. The increase in the number of attacks and BAB reflects increasing ability. Combat Relexes reflects training that allows you to take better advantage of the slips your opponents may make. While it is a "game", it makes some sense (more than one minute rounds with one attack).
I don't give helpless characters reflex saves; they can't react. Reflex saves are dodging or otherwise reacting to avoid danger. And yeah, I know it doesn't say specifically that helpless characters can't make reflex saves, but it doesn't say that dead characters can't move either. Besides, what kind of GM would I be if I just let the badguy that the players paralyzed make a reflex save?
Paralyzed is a relative thing. It may indicate that they can move nothing and are completely rigid or you might consider it the sessesion of major voluntary movement, still allowing minor movements / thrashing around weakly.
In any event things can be houseruled if you don't mind it. You could houserule that characters recieve an AoO for each attack they can take in a round. If you do that I wouldn't allow Combat Reflexes to give more than one extra AoO though. The current system itself is unlikely to change in any major way barring PF 2 or the second coming. Ymmv.
|
|
Watch The Princess Bride. There are a few fight scenes with Inigo Montoya where there really aren't any AoO. However, there is a scene where four mooks run past Inigo Montoya in a hallway and he takes 4 attacks, one on each of them (and drops them all I might add).
GREAT analogy Bob!
Yes Aeon, The Fighter in the front is doing a great job cleaving goblins left and right, as he was trained to do!
"Drats, those bloody fleeing goblins ran away, and I only got one swing!!!
But that frikin-wiley Halfling Rogue just made short work of the rest as the ran past him!? What Special Training did he get ANYWAY!!!???"
"It was no problem to dispatch them Sir ArmoredGuy," explains the wiley Hobbit, "I've trained my special Combat Reflexes for years for just such openings!"
And that's it in a nutshell :D
_________________
"you have killed my father, prepare to die"