termus's page

You finally got my point, this is where I wanted to go with the post to begin with, but you only seemed interested in commenting on what I had been saying doesn’t make since to you. The system I just suggested without any AC and all saving throws is exactly like 4x just with opposed attack rolls and saving throws instead of defenses that have to be hit like an AC. I think that this new CBM is going the same direction that 4x had used to get their system but pathfinder just didn’t go to the extreme that 4x had and make everything an AC. The point I planned to make is that I want something different than 4x and I don’t like the CBM system either. I think that the 3x system of opposed roles made since, it just slowed down to game play so match it made it no fun for everyone else. I would like to hear other options that could replace both systems to see if anyone else has a better idea.

I’m not saying make bull rush a ref save. I think a fort save would be more appropriate. This would change the example you used regarding huge fighter type and the small Halfling to be interpreted exactly the way you did. The burly tank type would not be push over and the small rouge would be pushed around easer. Not because of their ability to hit someone else, but because of the fighters better resilience represented but higher con and higher base fort save. Whereas Halfling rouge would have a lower base save and lower con and a neg for being small. Now it wouldn’t be a stretch to allow players to pick between fort and ref to negate and bull rush or interchange fort and ref for grapple. I could see the big bear of a man with a large fort not budging when the pesky monk only hugs him in vain with a negated grapple or the Halfling rouge dodging out of the way of bull rush.

If all attacks, either magical of physical, were made using the same format how would it be unbalanced. You could even go to the extreme of not having and armor class. You would need and new 4th save to replace AC to oppose melee attacks and your ref save would negate ranged attacks. Armor would be used as damaged reduction. I know some could think it’s different than what’s been out for d&d in the past, but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t work better and have a better flow on the table.

Why does BAB prevent me from being tripped? Prevent be me from being pushed back? Make me hold on o my weapon better? What does being able to hit someone in combat have to do with any of those things.

Why would you use BAB to prevent an effect and not a saving through when saves are designed to “save” you from negative affects already?

Why does a cloak of rest help when you have been poisoned? When you have been engulfed in a ball of fire? A trap dropping a very large block of stone on your head? …. Because it’s magic.

These examples were already listed in the post and they do not seem to out of wack.

* Adhesive (Ex), a special defense of the kuo-toa and mimic, which requires a save to avoid being disarmed.
* Awesome Blow, a feat from the Monster Manual, which requires a save to avoid being knocked back and knocked prone.
* Crush (Ex), a special attack of many true dragons, which requires a save to avoid being pinned.
* Engulf (Ex), a special attack of many oozes, which requires a save to avoid being grappled.
* Rust (Ex), a rust monster special defense, which requires a save to avoid having your weapon sundered.
* Whirlwind (Su), an air elemental and djinni special attack, which requires a save to avoid being grabbed and held.
* Vortex (Su), a water elemental special attack, which requires a save to avoid being grabbed and held.

The whole point of the post is to discuss how to make the already “wonky” rules better. Like I said in my earlier post the only this that is fundamental difference about the CBM is the opponent doesn’t roll a die, it’s like they are just taking 15 on the role. Most other people that have been play testing these rules don’t seem too happy with the CBM rules. No one seemed to happy with the old 3x rules either so why not try something completely different that is bases off something that is already in use and accepted as balanced.

All these rules are experimental and this post is just talking about what if it were different. The feats don’t matter because if system were to be changed to use saving troughs then they could just as easily tweak any feats if needed.

Yes I do like those extra feats. They are heading in the right direction of making the abilities more affective.

But I disagree that this suggestion would “re-complicate” things. Really the only thing that CBMs do now that 3.5 didn’t do is to give the defender an “ac” opposed to making a die roll and making all CBM standard actions. NMO both of these “improvements” are just mint to speed up game play. I don’t think changing the mechanic to have someone roll a touch attach and then having the opponent roll a save would slow anything down more than casting a spell does.

anyone have any idea how many pages?

I like the idea. I know it may seem like a stretch at first but why not make CBM's have a DC and cause a saving through resist them. Would it be so out of the question to the make the special attack actions that everyone has access to similar in structure as a spell or the Ex. attacks of certain monsters?

It would need a touch attack to initiate the special attack and if successful a saving through would have to be made to rest the affect. The DC would take into consideration the attackers pri ability and the generic +10 like a spell. It would need more to make it competive with the base save bonus that the spell level or the ½ creatures HD it the case of ex abilities, half your BAB isn’t that far of a stretch. The size mod could even be added directly into the DC but the defenders size mod would need to be added to the save (or just be a special neg to the DC).

The touch attack would take into count any defensive actions the opponent would have already taken. So things like expertise, full def action and cover would still count for something.

I do see the point about str and not con helping w bulrush or str helping you hold on to your weapon, est. but this is just an abstraction. I could see con helping you hold your ground against bulrush and having a strong grip doesn’t mean you don’t have butterfingers. If making a con based fort save to rest a bull rush tidies up game play for the other attacks *cough cough grapple* then so be it. It moves the calculating to the attackers so as a defender just needs to know is what save to make. Witch in my opinion is much more in line with the d20 system and backwards compatibly.

Then the special feats will increase the attacker’s effectiveness beyond the norm. and I would like to see a feet line that will make you better and different attacks. Maybe like greater bull rush which makes it easier to move to attacker more spaces or take an melee attack against them also or greater disarm that allows you to catch the weapon or throw it were you want.

This would also help with the scaling issue as long as saving thoughts are scaled properly.