Combat Maneuver improvements


Homebrew and House Rules


Would the following changes be broken?

1). Size modifiers do not exist. This includes what size you can attempt maneuvers against. If an ability normally would give you this bonus (like underfoot adept monks) you can reintroduce the number change, not the restrictions.

2). Combat maneuver feats scale, adding one higher bonus to CMB and CMD every 5 BAB after the first (+3 @ 6, +4 @ 11, etc) and the greater feat kicks in for free at 6th BAB.

3). You can make any combat maneuver with a weapon and in place of a weapon attack.

4). Combat maneuvers only provoke if the creature attempting it has a lesser version of the improved feat (a 1st level fighter with improved grapple provokes against a 6th level fighter with the same, and gets an ao v. a fighter without said option).

5). Grab and similar powers are considered the improved feat, with a bab appropriate for the bonus (+4 would be like a +11 bab for the previous houserule)

These are to hopefully encourage options other than vanilla attack/damage. Thoughts?


1) I would remove this one. The size modifiers and restrictions make a lot of sense mechanically. A gnome shouldn't be able to grapple a kraken.

2) Sounds fine for the free Greater. If you want the bonus to scale, I would have it start at +2, then increase by 1 at lvl 4 and every 4 after (like power attack), but remove the additional +2 from Greater.

3) I would add "*within reason"

4) I prefer "only provoke on a failed attempt without feat", but this one works too.

5) This is just making rule 2 work for monsters as well.


#3
I would say that the weapon should have a sliding penalty/ bonus depending on weapon description. For example, tripping with a longsword at Level 1 would be at a -1 but tripping with a light flail, or spiked chain would get a +1.

Increase/decrease by 1 every 4 levels

Maneuvers not using weapons are rolled as normal.

I think this would add a new dimension to weapon selection for maneuvers based characters ( I will never play another fighter without trip and disarm), it adds so much versatility especially in a low level game, or 6e.

Verdant Wheel

I good houserule I have used that I liked that I found on these forums is that maneuvers only provoke on a failed attempt.

There is some feat interaction (potential) if you are okay with that, which it seems you are.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Pretty reasonable changes for a home game, shouldn't cause too much havoc. I'd say 1) is the least needed, 5) the biggest headache, and 3) the sketchiest (pretty much just adding grapple, bull rush, and overrun to the 'weaponable' list).

Scud422 wrote:
1) I would remove this one. The size modifiers and restrictions make a lot of sense mechanically. A gnome shouldn't be able to grapple a kraken.

I agree, however gnomes *can* grapple krakens. Grapple has no size restriction (Grab does however). Bull Rush, Overrun, and Trip do.


Thanks for the input everyone!

1) I did consider that this could be silly, but the change isn't huge, it just helps keep it possible for a combat maneuver focused character to succeed on huge and gargantuan creatures. Its still pretty difficult for a gnome to bull rush a kracken, and this seems somewhat noninvasive (I just have to note 2 quick modifiers on creatures). It is silly, but the game and setting this is for isn't incredibly serious, nor are the players.

2) Thanks for the scaling advice, I think Power Attack scaling works much better and will go with that. I am also considering having combat expertise scale like power attack (-1/+2) so these should be easier to explain.

3) I meant to include "within reason", so thanks for catching that. I would like to add specific modifiers per weapon, but that seems rather difficult to arrange. I might try it though.

4) Only provoking on failure works much better than what I had, and eliminates the need for 5, to thanks!

One last question, what (if anything) could help combat maneuvers relevant at mid levels (around 5-9) where larger, stronger creatures have massive CMD's?

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

3) Most combat maneuvers already let you do this. And the ones that don't have very good reasons to not let you do them in place of attacks.

I would have liked if Feint was a combat maneuver instead of a Bluff check. Instead of a standard action, it could take the place of a melee attack that bestows a penalty to the opponent's AC for your next attack. The Greater Feint would cause it to deny Dexterity bonus to AC for the next attack.


Paradozen wrote:
One last question, what (if anything) could help combat maneuvers relevant at mid levels (around 5-9) where larger, stronger creatures have massive CMD's?

Flanking, buffs, debuffs, getting the creature flat-footed.

Many combat maneuvers could potentially cripple an opponent, so it is in your whole group's interest to help you land that Disarm or Dirty Trick.


I have an idea I've been thinking about for a few years that would greatly expand combat maneuvers they wouldn't all be based on bab, str, and dex. Instead it would depend on the maneuver and use. A counter spell maneuver would use caster level instead of bab. Feint would use bab and Cha OR bluff skill bonus. A bull rush like maneuver where you scare the target back a couple of steps would function like feint but with intimidate. There would be a con based one to hold you ground and take abuse for a round. A dex based one to be dodgy, like total defense or acrobatics but more interactive.

Anyways, I know these are all very vague but I want characters to have appealing combat options outside of full attack and cast spell.

Verdant Wheel

Ciaran, spitballing here:

Bull Rush - CMB or Intimidate
Dirty Trick - CMB or Bluff
Disarm - CMB or Sleight of Hand
Drag - CMB or Climb
Grapple - CMB or Climb
Overrun - CMB or Intimidate
Reposition - CMB or Acrobatics
Steal - CMB or Sleight of Hand
Sunder - CMB or Disable Device
Trip - CMB or Acrobatics

What do you do about the dilemma in which skills are easier to obtain bonuses to than CMD? By assigning a penalty to the skilled attempt but not the CMB attempt? Or by having the skill attempt draw a pre-emptive AoO whereas a CMB attempt provokes only on failure?

Maybe the skilled maneuver must exceed CMD by 5 in order to succeed? And if it only "merely" succeeds (by less a margin than 5), the defender may make a simultaneous AoO?

...


You have grasped the intent of my idea, although I want there to be a lot more maneuvers than there are now. Some would allow use skills, but allow combat specific options. maybe some don't have a skill option. Like the example I mentioned before, using Intimidate to "bullrush" someone away from you. Or, using BAB and Cha. It is a pipe dream to want combat maneuvers to feel like a fun or meaningful option in a fight?

You also raise a good concern. I suppose one advantage of using BAB / caster level is that it requires no investment of skill points, so in a sense it's free. Perhaps the rules governing skill vs BAB/CL can have some caveats like those you suggest. One idea I've had is that you don't provoke if your BAB is higher than the targets. That would give a perk to the full BAB guys that is not given to those with a lot of skills.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Combat Maneuver improvements All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules