Trip attacks & weapon damage?

One of my the PCs in my game wields an urumi (PF Campaign Setting, p. 209-211). For those not in the know, this is a bladed whip, or a flexible sword, much like the weapon wielded by the girl in the Soul Caliber game.

Anyhow, the player is arguing that when he makes a trip attack, he should be doing weapon damage, point out that the rules (PF Beta, p.151) state "you can attempt to trip an opponent as part of a melee attack. Though I agree that logically, a creature being tripped by the weapon would be taking damage, I'm not sure that the above reference to melee attack really implies damage. Furthermore, I feel that if a trip attack can do damage, it's unbalanced as why wouldn't the urumi-wielder anyone not use the trip attack every time.

What do other people think?

One of my the PCs in my game wields an urumi (PF Campaign Setting, p. 209-211). For those not in the know, this is a bladed whip, or a flexible sword, much like the weapon wielded by the girl in the Soul Caliber game.

Anyhow, the player is arguing that when he makes a trip attack, he should be doing weapon damage, point out that the rules (PF Beta, p.151) state "you can attempt to trip an opponent as part of a melee attack. Though I agree that logically, a creature being tripped by the weapon would be taking damage, I'm not sure that the above reference to melee attack really implies damage. Furthermore, I feel that if a trip attack can do damage, it's unbalanced as why wouldn't the urumi-wielder anyone not use the trip attack every time.

What do other people think?

My knowledge is based on the 3.5 rules, and might not be completely correct in the PF rules, but should be very close. First, not all weapons allow you to trip with them. The fact that this one does means just that, you can use the weapon to make a trip attempt, as oppossed to your hands and feet. The benefit to this is 1.) you do not provoke for using a weapon, 2.) weapons usually give you a small bonus like +2 to Trip, and 3.) should you fail, and the target tries to trip you back (for free), you can just drop the weapon to avoid them tripping you back.

That being said, no, you wouldn't deal damage with the weapon and trip. It is one or the other. If you try to trip, you have to make a melee touch attack rather than an attack roll, and if that hits, you make the trip attempt.

Finally, if you have the Improved Trip Feat, if you trip the target, you follow that up with a free attack, (which may be what your player is saying). This actually happens afterwards, not as you trip them. (Which is better, because than you get the bonus for them being prone +4).

The specific weapon may say something else, but that is how it normally works.

Apparently the new "Improved Trip" doesn't come with the follow-up attack.

You're tripping, not cutting their feet off, so no, weapon damage is NOT included with the trip attempt.

In Beta Combat, pages 150-151 have the relevant rules:

Tripping is a Combat Maneuver. "When performing
a combat maneuver, you must use an action appropriate
to the maneuver you are attempting to perform. While
most combat maneuvers can be performed as part of an
attack action (in place of a melee attack), others require
specific actions. Unless otherwise stated, performing
a combat maneuver provokes an attack of opportunity
from the target of the maneuver. If you are hit by the
target, add the damage to the DC to perform the maneuver."

The important thing to note here is that the maneuver is in place of the actual melee attack. Melee attack is the type of action needed to perform the trip.

Unless he has Improved Trip, the target of the trip gets an attack of opportunity, and the damage increases the difficulty of succeeding in the trip.

Trip on page 151, reads:
"You can attempt to trip an opponent as a melee attack. You
can only trip an opponent who is one size category larger
than you or smaller. If you do not have the Improved Trip
feat, or a similar ability, initiating a trip provokes an attack
of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.
If your attack is successful, the target is knocked prone.
If your attack fails by 10 or more, you are knocked prone
instead. If the target has more than two legs, add +2 to
the DC of the combat maneuver attack roll for each additional
leg it has. Some creatures, such as oozes without
legs and flying creatures, cannot be tripped."

Again, the action needed is a melee attack. Not a ranged attack, not a move action. If you are unable to make a melee attack you cannot trip.

Wow, damage and trip, all in one attack.

I'm surprised he didn't ask for the guy he trips to take falling damage, too. Oh, yeah, and when I trip him, and wound his leg, he has to move at half speed until healed. Oh, yeah, and he is -4 AC and -4 To Hit because he's limping. Oh, yeah, and bleeding too. And nauseated from the concussion when his head hit the ground. Yeah, my trip does all that!

***********************************************************************

Once you trip the foe, he's prone. He has to stand up, provoking an AoO, or fight prone with penalties to hit and AC. This means that you lose one damaging attack to trip him, but you get it back as an AoO - even steven.

If the foe has multiple attacks (dual wielding, iterative attacks, multiple natural attacks, etc.) then standing up uses a move action so he can only make one standard attack in his round instead of full attacking. This means many foes lose attacks and never get them back.

Further, once you have iterative attacks, you can attack for damage with your first attack(s) and use CMB to trip for your last attacks since they will probably miss with the low BAB (but CMB isn't reduced for iterative attacks, so it's still at it's full value, even as the last attack of an iterative sequence). This means you always trip at your max CMB.

Hot tip: If you have iterative attacks, say 4 attacks. Your last attack is at -15 to your BAB, so instead, you trip your foe at full CMB. This means you lose your worst attack at -15 to hit. On the foe's round he stands up, provoking an AoO which you take at FULL BAB. So you've traded your crummy little -15 attack for a full BAB attack.

All that isn't enough of a bonus for this player?

To summarize:

He'll use just one of his attacks to trip (no damage). He'll get that attack back as an AoO when the foe stands up. While the foe is prone, all of your PCs can attack him with penalties to the prone foe's AC, so while he's prone, the whole party does more damage to him. And it limits the foes number of attacks every round, so the PCs take less damage.

Do more damage, take less damage, still dish out the same number of attacks...

Trip is fine just how it is.

Trip is fine just how it is.

I disagree since in 3.5 having a two handed weapon meant that there was no AoO against you if you use the ability.

Having completely nerfed "Improved Trip" they should at least remove the 'combat expertise' pre-requisite from it.

The changes that nerfed it.
1. 20% bonus reduced to 10% (i.e. +2)
2. No follow-up attack.
3. Weapon type (two handed weap.) doesn't prevent AoO

Now, if your opponent takes an AoO on an ally, your initiating a trip attempt would also trigger an AoO but your opponent would have already used his AoO, so only then does making a Trip attack make sense.

Furthermore, if removing Combat Expertise, as a prerequisite, then you 'can' make the following a prerequisite
Prerequisite Agility OR Combat Expertise OR STR 12 OR DEX 14
Dex to trip is because you don’t always need strength to take someone down, Judo would be an example of this.

DM_Blake wrote:

Trip is fine just how it is.

I disagree since in 3.5 having a two handed weapon meant that there was no AoO against you if you use the ability.

I was referring to the maneuver not the feat.

Feats to make you better with the maneuver are all well and good, assuming the core maneuver is mechanically sound.

Doing damage as part of the maneuver is overpowered - the maneuver is fine just how it is.

As for the Improved Trip feat, I see no need for Combat Expertise to be a prerequisite for it at all - the ability to convert your offense to defense is not really related to the ability to snag your opponent's leg and trip him.

I don't know why using a two-handed weapon should prevent the AoO. You want to trip someone with your quarterstaff, well, he just might smack you in the head as you try to hook the back of his knee.

Tripping with a halberd would be the same, but IIRC, the halberd gives you a bonus to the trip CMB roll, but otherwise, you're still hooking your opponent's knee, and he just might smack you in the head while you're doing that.

And the Improved Trip follow-up attack was too much. It made trip-monkeys too powerful. Once someone started down the trip-monkey path, the DM immediately knew that from that day forward, every combat he ever runs with that character in it will devolve into trip/attack, trip/attack, trip/attack for all of eternity.

And since the build was so powerful (right weapon, right feats, and suddenly you can attack almost all of your opponents on the ground, with bonuses, and without losing any attacks - but your opponents lose their multiple attacks every round), it was almost impossible to find a D&D group without a trip-monkey in it.

I for one am glad to see that feat toned down. Trip is powerful enough without Improved Trip turning it into an Easy-Win button.

ooooh, ooooh, eeek, eeeek! <--- Trip Monkey

I'm the trip monkey in my party, and I'm a psion3/PsionicWarrior1 such that when I run out of power points I can aid the rest of the party by tripping opponents.

I've also found that by moving into a support role, I'm more able to conserve my power points and leave them for times that they really count.

I've thought of making a Dwarf Wizard who takes his first level as a fighter so that he can get an enlarge person spell to give him size, but the bonus there has been nerfed to +1 from +4.

Besides, it is not just about getting your quarterstaff behind his knee, it may require your shoulder to his chest to throw off his strike AND to imbalance him.

Also, hook his ankle - or better yet, simply sweep him while colliding with him or after his own thrust/blow misses you and he's off balance.

Besides, it is not just about getting your quarterstaff behind his knee, it may require your shoulder to his chest to throw off his strike AND to imbalance him.

Also, hook his ankle - or better yet, simply sweep him while colliding with him or after his own thrust/blow misses you and he's off balance.

Hence the AoO you'll suffer, regardless of weapon, if this is how you show your foe where lie down.

(I used to study Aikido. Our Sensei referred to many Aikido moves as pulling your opponent into you, like a hug. First you show him love. Then you show him where to lie down as you complete the maneuver and leave the foe laying on the ground).

Thanks guys, this all pretty much confirms what I thought. Krome, good catch on that line in the CMB rules.

DM_Blake wrote:

Trip is fine just how it is.

I disagree since in 3.5 having a two handed weapon meant that there was no AoO against you if you use the ability.

Where the heck does this come from, I'm pretty handy with the rules and I don't ever remember seeing this? can you link the SRD where you get that from? I mean honestly it doesn't even make any sense to me.

As for the OP yeah, your player is wrong, no damage on a CMB trip.

Further, once you have iterative attacks, you can attack for damage with your first attack(s) and use CMB to trip for your last attacks since they will probably miss with the low BAB (but CMB isn't reduced for iterative attacks, so it's still at it's full value, even as the last attack of an iterative sequence). This means you always trip at your max CMB.

Hot tip: If you have iterative attacks, say 4 attacks. Your last attack is at -15 to your BAB, so instead, you trip your foe at full CMB. This means you lose your worst attack at -15 to hit. On the foe's round he stands up, provoking an AoO which you take at FULL BAB. So you've traded your crummy little -15 attack for a full BAB attack.

There is no particular reason to believe that you can make Combat Manuever checks at full BAB with your later iterative attacks. This is not made clear by the rules explicitly though, leaving the room for confusion/assumptions.

Formula for melee attack bonus: BAB + Str + other modifiers. Iterative uses the successively lower BAB numbers.
Formula for combat maneuver bonus: BAB + Str + special modifiers. No reason to assume that iterative manuevers do not use the successively lower BAB numbers as well.

DM_Blake wrote:

Further, once you have iterative attacks, you can attack for damage with your first attack(s) and use CMB to trip for your last attacks since they will probably miss with the low BAB (but CMB isn't reduced for iterative attacks, so it's still at it's full value, even as the last attack of an iterative sequence). This means you always trip at your max CMB.

Hot tip: If you have iterative attacks, say 4 attacks. Your last attack is at -15 to your BAB, so instead, you trip your foe at full CMB. This means you lose your worst attack at -15 to hit. On the foe's round he stands up, provoking an AoO which you take at FULL BAB. So you've traded your crummy little -15 attack for a full BAB attack.

There is no particular reason to believe that you can make Combat Manuever checks at full BAB with your later iterative attacks. This is not made clear by the rules explicitly though, leaving the room for confusion/assumptions.

Formula for melee attack bonus: BAB + Str + other modifiers. Iterative uses the successively lower BAB numbers.
Formula for combat maneuver bonus: BAB + Str + special modifiers. No reason to assume that iterative manuevers do not use the successively lower BAB numbers as well.

Well, maybe true.

But this logic breaks down when you realize you are rolling against a DC that equals 15 + your target's CMB.

Which target CMB, his best or his worst?

Well, he's not making iterative attacks when you attack him, so clearly it's against his highest CMB value.

Which means you're doomed to fail any CMB checks with your lower iterative attacks - heck it's bad enough trying your best CMB against 15+CMB of your opponent.

Your supposition that iterative attacks use the successively lower BAB numbers will make it intrisically impossible to use CMB with anything but your first attack, 2nd at most agaisnt foes with weak CMBs.

My supposition that CMB is static means CMB is by far a better choice for those attacks on the tail end of an iterative sequence for the reasons I have described above.

To me, neither ruling seems to be a well-balanced game mechanic, but if I had to choose, I would say your mechanic limits CMB maneuvers too much and makes them less fun, so I'd likely choose the other supposition.

I do agree with you that the rules need official clarification on this.

Where the heck does this come from, I'm pretty handy with the rules and I don't ever remember seeing this? can you link the SRD where you get that from? I mean honestly it doesn't even make any sense to me.

P.159 PHB "Tripping With a Weapon"

Chovesh wrote:

DM_Blake wrote:

Trip is fine just how it is.

I disagree since in 3.5 having a two handed weapon meant that there was no AoO against you if you use the ability.

Where the heck does this come from, I'm pretty handy with the rules and I don't ever remember seeing this? can you link the SRD where you get that from? I mean honestly it doesn't even make any sense to me.

As for the OP yeah, your player is wrong, no damage on a CMB trip.

Actually, according to the SRD:

Tripping with a Weapon

Some weapons can be used to make trip attacks. In this case, you make a melee touch attack with the weapon instead of an unarmed melee touch attack, and you don’t provoke an attack of opportunity.

This doesn't say that there are different rules for 2h weapons vs. 1h weapons though. They're all the same.

I had kinda forgotten this.

Long ago I houseruled that this only applies to weapons designed for tripping (if it says they get a bonus to Trip attempts). All other weapons still provoke, unless you take a feat that says otherwise.

I've used this houserule for so long that I didn't remember the actual rule.

Further, once you have iterative attacks, you can attack for damage with your first attack(s) and use CMB to trip for your last attacks since they will probably miss with the low BAB (but CMB isn't reduced for iterative attacks, so it's still at it's full value, even as the last attack of an iterative sequence). This means you always trip at your max CMB.

Ummm Combat Maneuvers DO use the reduced iterative attacks.

Let's take a Fighter 15. His BAB is 15/10/5. So if he attacks first, he has a BAB of +15. If he Trips second his CMB is 10+STR+Size Mod. If he tries to Grapple third, his CMB is now, 5+STR+Size Mod.

The formula for CMB is BAB+STR Mod+Special Size Mod. So, as that BAB goes down for iterative attacks, so does the CMB.

And HOPEFULLY they fixed the definition of Combat Maneuvers. Please, Jason or James, tell me it was fixed. In Beta the rule for a Maneuver was to make an attack roll and add the CMB to it. An attack roll was defined as d20+BAB+STR mod+ Size Mod. Simplified, in Beta, the total formula for a Maneuver is d20+2xBAB+2xSTR Mod. By level 10 a Fighter drops his weapons and does Maneuvers every round and almost never fails except on a roll of 1.

Ummm Combat Maneuvers DO use the reduced iterative attacks.

I just don't buy it.

CMB is already hard enough to use.

Take two evenly matched wrestlers. Say they both are +12 on their CMB. They each need to roll a 27 (15+12) DC to land a maneuver. With +12 on their rolls, they must roll a 15 or higher on the d20. That's a 30% chance.

Miss
Miss
Gotcha!
Miss
Miss
Miss
Gotcha!
Miss
Miss
Gotcha!

Those are pretty ugly odds.

But now take iterative into consideration. Assuming those guys get two iterative attacks, their second attack would need to roll a natural 20. They've gone from a fairly crappy 30% chance down to an unbelieveably crappy and ridiculously useless game mechanic chance of 5%.

Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss
Gotcha!
Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss
Miss

That's a whole lotta rolling for virtually nothing.

Who would even bother?

And if nobody would bother using it, who would even bother creating this mechanic for a game?

I realize my supposition that CMB doesn't scale down with iterations makes it an irresistably powerful option for the last attack in an iterative sequence, which is also undesirable.

But at least people will land their CMB rolls often enough to justify the page-count and space used to include the rules in the book.

There's no iterative attacks with CMB: you must use a standard action to do a CMB (which means you can't use 'em in AoOs either), except for disarm, sunder and trip (which can be done as an attack, and thus multiple times at lower iteratives...)