| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I believe it was James Jacobs, he posted that Shields could be used as single attacks or AoO`s (without off-hand penalties, which apparently only exist within the framework of 2WF). Implicitly meaning you can single-weapon Full Attack with a Shield if you want, and likely use it as a main-hand weapon along with UAS as off-hand (or whatever). Makes sense since they are listed as a weapon, and never says you can ONLY use them as off-hands, even if their description only discusses that aspect.
Fighting defensively gets you +2 AC already, then the feat:
While using this style and fighting defensively or using the total defense action, you gain an additional +1 dodge bonus to your Armor Class.Adds +1
Then acrobatics at 3+ ranks adds another +1.
Total of +4 ;)
I JUST LOVE FEAT TREES THAT ARE WORTH TAKING! :D
EDIT: Visiting a friend tonight who got his PDF copy. He's going to let me peruse it for an hour or two.
Will get back to you all. :D
I don't know how performance combat works yet, so this might not be 100% viable, but now I want to play an ex-gladiator adventurer who can't stop showboating even when no-one can see him. It's the only way he knows how to fight.
I don't know how performance combat works yet, so this might not be 100% viable, but now I want to play an ex-gladiator adventurer who can't stop showboating even when no-one can see him. It's the only way he knows how to fight.
Order of the Cockatrice Cabalier?
Do you need a crowd to use Performance feats or no? It'd be kinda silly to master fighting maneuvers that only work when a crowd is watching, but they mysteriously stop working on enemies when the crowd isn't thereThere's a feat that lets you get around this.
Interesting. Sucks it's a feat cost, but at least the option is there.
Interesting. Sucks it's a feat cost, but at least the option is there.Do you need a crowd to use Performance feats or no? It'd be kinda silly to master fighting maneuvers that only work when a crowd is watching, but they mysteriously stop working on enemies when the crowd isn't thereThere's a feat that lets you get around this.
It does other things too.
Wow, super cool idea!!!! I hope and pray all 5 of the classic animals are represented (crane, tiger, dragon, leopard, snake). I really like that picture, aside from one thing ... his crane stance is pretty bad! The raised foot should be angled in to protect the family jewels; with that stance, his gro-in is wide open!!
What do you know. Perhaps the Monk os faking a weakness to draw the enemy to come for a punch.
Wow, super cool idea!!!! I hope and pray all 5 of the classic animals are represented (crane, tiger, dragon, leopard, snake)
From my understanding, those 5 and 11 more are in the book.
I don't know how performance combat works yet, so this might not be 100% viable, but now I want to play an ex-gladiator adventurer who can't stop showboating even when no-one can see him. It's the only way he knows how to fight.
You mean Leadership? :)
Am I the only one who is confused? What is a performance combat check?There is a section on optional rules. Performance combat is in that section. Think running gladiatorial combat and trying to win the favor of the crowd.
So, basically, kind of like pro wrestling.
So, basically, kind of like pro wrestling.Am I the only one who is confused? What is a performance combat check?There is a section on optional rules. Performance combat is in that section. Think running gladiatorial combat and trying to win the favor of the crowd.
*gurk* No! Gladiatorial combat.
Have they now? I don't comb the boards as thoroughly as a lotta folks do, so I must've missed that clarification.Developers have already debunked that one. You are likely right when using the shield in conjunction with another weapon, but if I ONLY attack with the shield in a round, it is considered my primary weapon.Shield attack can't be done as a primary weapon. Check out the Core Rulebook weapons chapter: "You can bash an opponent with a shield, using it as an "
It says what it does and it does what it says.
Point being Jasont that, in my humble opinion, if they really are off-hand only it would suck. Expecially considering the effort spent in pumping several stats and invest a long list of feats in your character.
Jason, for the next and final preview can you show us the dervish dancer archetype.
|
...allowing you to deflect melee attacks with ease.
...you can deflect one melee weapon attack that would normally hit you.
Which is it? All melee, or armed melee only? Is this THAT specific on purpose? If so, then I would rule this feat useless against:
A) Most monsters
B) Other Monks
The latter part hits my suspension of disbelief pretty hard. It could be based upon some real-world, only-works-against-armed-attackers martial arts style, but nothing is really coming to mind here. Typically you're taught to block armed and unarmed alike.
Just wondering if this was a design decision to make the feat less desirable, or what.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
...allowing you to deflect melee attacks with ease....you can deflect one melee weapon attack that would normally hit you.Which is it? All melee, or armed melee only? Is this THAT specific on purpose? If so, then I would rule this feat useless against:
A) Most monsters
B) Other Monks
The latter part hits my suspension of disbelief pretty hard. It could be based upon some real-world, only-works-against-armed-attackers martial arts style, but nothing is really coming to mind here. Typically you're taught to block armed and unarmed alike.
Just wondering if this was a design decision to make the feat less desirable, or what.
Natural weapons are still weapons, right? :)
...allowing you to deflect melee attacks with ease....you can deflect one melee weapon attack that would normally hit you.Which is it? All melee, or armed melee only? Is this THAT specific on purpose? If so, then I would rule this feat useless against:
A) Most monsters
B) Other Monks
The latter part hits my suspension of disbelief pretty hard. It could be based upon some real-world, only-works-against-armed-attackers martial arts style, but nothing is really coming to mind here. Typically you're taught to block armed and unarmed alike.
Just wondering if this was a design decision to make the feat less desirable, or what.
Natural weapons and unarmed strikes are considered weapons. The former literally is called a weapon in its own name. The latter appears on the weapons table. Therefore they are both weapons. :D
With a sharp enough knife, sure. :-P
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Natural weapons and unarmed strikes are considered weapons. The former literally is called a weapon in its own name. The latter appears on the weapons table. Therefore they are both weapons. :D...and they're subject to disarm rules, as well, then?
Deflect =/= disarm.
Also, being able to be disarmed is not a necessary precondition of being a weapon. Even in manufactured weapons, an armor spike cannot be disarmed but is still a weapon, for example.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is there a difference between ´you can deflect one melee weapon attack´ and ´you can deflect one melee attack´? (the more commonly used phrasing)
This reminds me: is there any terminology difference when referring to ´melee weapon/damage dealing attacks´ vs. ´melee attacks including melee ranger maneuvers´?
Both would seem to be included under ´melee attacks´ (which is the only phrase I commonly see used)...?
Is there a difference between ´you can deflect one melee weapon attack´ and ´you can deflect one melee attack´? (the more commonly used phrasing)
This reminds me: is there any terminology difference when referring to ´melee weapon/damage dealing attacks´ vs. ´melee attacks including melee ranger maneuvers´?
Both would seem to be included under ´melee attacks´ (which is the only phrase I commonly see used)...?
Maybe it won't let you deflect melee touch attacks, from spells or otherwise?
Possibly more than anything else in Pathfinder, I would love a rule that says any bonus granted to fighting defensively works with Combat Expertise. It would make it a more worthwhile feat, and lessen the anger a lot of people who hate having to take it to get the feats they want. Plus, this new style makes it almost obsolete, unless there's another style you just gotta have, and you just gotta use combat ex with it. But I don't see that happening.
Possibly more than anything else in Pathfinder, I would love a rule that says any bonus granted to fighting defensively works with Combat Expertise. It would make it a more worthwhile feat, and lessen the anger a lot of people who hate having to take it to get the feats they want. Plus, this new style makes it almost obsolete, unless there's another style you just gotta have, and you just gotta use combat ex with it. But I don't see that happening.
You don't need a rule for that. Combat Experties is done as part of the attack(s) and grants a Dodge Bonus. Fighting Defensively is a standard action(or full-action) with attacks which grants a dodge bonus.
You declare you Fight Defensively then declare you're taking the Combat Expertise penalties on that attack(s). Both Dodge bonuses stack.
*edit*
sorry correction, There seems to be an error in PRD. Defensive Fighting is an untyped AC bonus as a Standard Action, but a Dodge bonus as a Full-Round action.
Possibly more than anything else in Pathfinder, I would love a rule that says any bonus granted to fighting defensively works with Combat Expertise. It would make it a more worthwhile feat, and lessen the anger a lot of people who hate having to take it to get the feats they want. Plus, this new style makes it almost obsolete, unless there's another style you just gotta have, and you just gotta use combat ex with it. But I don't see that happening.You don't need a rule for that. Combat Experties is done as part of the attack(s) and grants a Dodge Bonus. Fighting Defensively is a standard action(or full-action) with attacks which grants a dodge bonus.
You declare you Fight Defensively then declare you're taking the Combat Expertise penalties on that attack(s). Both Dodge bonuses stack.
*edit*
sorry correction, There seems to be an error in PRD. Defensive Fighting is an untyped AC bonus as a Standard Action, but a Dodge bonus as a Full-Round action.
That doesn't really help. If I'm better at fighting defensively (taking an attack penalty to aid AC) then I should be better at combat expertise (taking an attack penalty to aid AC). Its kind of a slap in the face to say, yeah you took a feat to do exactly that, but whenever we give out these types of abilities, we're only going to give them to people who didn't waste a feat on it. Saying oh you can take even more penalties to gain a lesser benefit isn't a good solution.
That doesn't really help. If I'm better at fighting defensively (taking an attack penalty to aid AC) then I should be better at combat expertise (taking an attack penalty to aid AC). Its kind of a slap in the face to say, yeah you took a feat to do exactly that, but whenever we give out these types of abilities, we're only going to give them to people who didn't waste a feat on it. Saying oh you can take even more penalties to gain a lesser benefit isn't a good solution.
You stated they couldn't be combined, I was pointing out they could. Fighting Defensively, Combat Expertise, 3 Ranks in Acrobatics make for a very strong defensive burst. Throw that on a heavy armor fighter, who's bonuses to hit are really around to be used for tactics like this, and you have a solid high AC character.
Unless you've gotten a look at the subscriber PDF you don't know what else is in UC, including anything for boosting combat expertise. Before we rant about how "fighters don't get nice things" lets wait till August 4th to find out. Or we could ask the subscribers if there are any defensive feats that Tree off combat expertise.
Personally I'd throw Crain style on to a heavy AC fighter. If space permits add in shield bashing (which still needs an FAQ post about being usable as primary hand attack). A spike heavy shield (unless UC has something for bashing with tower shields), an open hand, and one of the highest defensive ACs you'll find.
Some of the feat concepts I had thrown into the hopper involved follow-ups to Combat Expertise that were similar in scope to Furious Focus, etc. as follow-ups to Power Attack. However, they did not make it into the final.
WHY!?!?!?!?!? Oh well, back to the houserule.
Hmm, perfect for this defensive monk I had been throwing ideas around for. So long Duelist levels and Hamatulatsu.
The entire attack is negated. If it would've hit, the player can choose to negate it if they have not negated an attack yet.
And yes, this does work with natural attacks and unarmed attacks.