OCEANSHIELDWOLPF 2.0 wrote:dmerceless wrote:- Reducing the number of combat maneuvers you get by default in comparison to PF1 and making them into feats was a conscious design decision to ease up the amount of stuff new players need to learn about combat.If this means making options anyone should have into a choice you need to invest in just to attempt it as a remedy for not having to know about it in the first place to help new players from exploding from knowing too much....it seems like a backwards approach. A new player might ask if they can do something in combat, and might not initially be bombarded with the mechanical options before playing. Only to be told "Yes you can do that...if you have the feat." How has that not increased the amount of "stuff new players need to learn about combat"?
Would you try to Disarm someone in P1 without Improved Disarm? Most likely no, you'd take the feat so you can avoid the AoO.Same here, but without the punishment if you try without.
That said I'm pretty sure these required to invest in skill points, not feats, and the actual quote referred to something else.
To be real, the disarm provoking an AoO isn't the actual problem. Sure, it's strictly worse than not having the feat, but the killer is taking the damage from the AoO as a penalty on the disarm roll. That's the ridiculous part of it.
Though to be perfectly fair, the AoO was plenty discouraging even not knowing about the penalty.