Not a fan of these. I don't like not being able to use multiple feats at once, and I certainly don't like the limitation of having to use a feat in a previous round to enable the use of a feat in an immediately successive round.
For example, having to use dodge before using mobility in the following round is awful. The dynamics of any given encounter can change the situation dramatically. I might use dodge one round just for the sake of using mobility the following round, but by the time my turn comes, the situation could have changed entirely. I would rather be able to use mobility with a +4 to AC whenever I want.
And why can't I use precise shot and point blank shot in the same round? That's just silly. I either take a -3 for firing into melee within 30ft. or I only get to negate the -4 penalty for firing into melee? It's like having the ability to not use a feat. It just seems like I'm having something taken away from me.
agreed I find the concept to be overly limiting.
I'm torn on these.
I like the idea of one feat building on another through the combat. Rather than just attacking round after round, you get possibilities for some "combos". Seems like it would add some excitement to the combat to see if you can pull off the later feats.
But...they don't really build on each other - you just have to pass time.
"Hey everybody, fight defensively for the first two rounds while I wait for my Devastating Chop to power up!". The Overhand Chop should have to HIT before you can use Backswing. And the Backswing has to HIT before you get to Devastating Chop. Then you have some excitement hoping that you can get off your combo (wonder if I'll be flamed for that choice of words?).
I agree with the OP on Dodge/Mobility. Those shouldn't be tied together. What, I have to hop around a bit at the back of the group before charging into the battle? And Precise and Point should be used together - or they should be made more powerful if you can only use one or the other.
|
I like the idea of one feat building on another through the combat. Rather than just attacking round after round, you get possibilities for some "combos". Seems like it would add some excitement to the combat to see if you can pull off the later feats.
As I think about it, I would also be a fan of combo feats - feats that build off each other or give added benefits when used together, rather than making a character choose either/or. WOTC did try to do this somewhat with Tactical feats, but to me they were very poorly done because of the specific situations they could be used in and the long list of prereqs needed. I think a "combo" approach would be a great way to give characters more options in a combat. Combo feats that improved tactical mobility would be sweet - it would hopefully bring an end to the constant 5ft adjusting that makes tactical battle not really that tactical.
|
Please point me in the right direction here. I find nothing the rules at all that says you cannot use them at the same time. In order to learn Mobility you must already know Dodge, but that does not mean you cannot use both, nor do you have to use Doge before you can use Mobility.
Same thing for Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot. I find nothing in the rules that says you cannot use both.
In fact, as a Fighter it is not uncommon for me to to trade some BAB to Combat Expertise and to Power Attack and then attempt an Improved Disarm.
For example I get 3 attacks at level 15 (+15/+10/+5)
For my attacks I decide to forego my third attack. I have +10 BAB worth of points to play with.
I choose to remove 3 points from the BAB using Combat Expertise, and apply them to AC as a dodge bonus. I remove 6 points from my BAB using Power Attack and apply them to Damage.
My First attack I attack at +6 to hit, have +3 to AC until my next turn and should I hit apply an extra 6 points of damage.
For my second attack I decide I want to disarm the opponent. I have a +1 to attack and still have that +3 to AC but he doesn't get an AoO because I have Improved Disarm. If I win an opposed roll he is disarmed.
So, while I did not actually move more than 5 feet that round I increased my AC, increased my damage, and disarmed my opponent. Hardly a static round.
Now the logical thing the opponent would do is NOT stand there, but use the Withdraw maneuver and move up to 2x his move away from me.
On my turn I have to choose whether to follow and loose my attacks or find another opponent.
Hardly a static combat. (this added to emphasize that iterative attacks- another thread- leads to static combats)
Please point me in the right direction here. I find nothing the rules at all that says you cannot use them at the same time.
Page 34. Combat Feats, "Combat feats represent various maneuvers and tricks that characters can attempt to perform in combat. Although
these feats can be utilized any number of times per day,you cannot utilize more than one combat feat in any
given round."
I see that part too. What I'm missing is where it says "You have to use a pre-requisite in the round before you can use another combat feat". No where can I see you need to use Dodge before you can use Mobility in combat, just that you have to possess Dodge in order to take Mobility.
It lists it in the Mobility Text (Don't have my printout handy, but I believe it's at the top of the page following the Mobility heading and says something along the lines of "you must have used the dodge feat in the previous round")
|
|
Please point me in the right direction here. I find nothing the rules at all that says you cannot use them at the same time.Page 34. Combat Feats, "Combat feats represent various maneuvers and tricks that characters can attempt to perform in combat. Although
these feats can be utilized any number of times per day,
you cannot utilize more than one combat feat in any
given round."
Thanks, I completely missed that.
OK that is a universal SUCKS! No way, not in my game. Ain't happening. Period. If this rule makes it to the final version it will be houseruled out in less than a Plank Second!
Nope nope nope. This one HAS to go. Major bad juju!
*spits three times and spins in circles*
I like the idea of combat feats, only one of which is useable per round. I completely agree however that building from round to round sounds problematic. To use Dodge, do I have to actually be in combat, or threatened? Can I just say when combat starts: "Well, I do Dodge every single round all day long so I'm ready to go with Mobility!" And then, in round 2 when I do Mobility, do I actually have to move? Just doesn't make sense--I think I should be able to Whirlwind on demand. After all, I've spent several levels and feats to get to the point where Whirlwind Attack is an option.
That said, I'm certainly open to some kind of "super-feats" that need a build-up of one or more rounds to allow me to do something really cool.
That said, I'm certainly open to some kind of "super-feats" that need a build-up of one or more rounds to allow me to do something really cool.
Just thinking outloud here but what if the number of combat feats that could be used in a round increases with Class Level? Say you get to use a second combat feat in a round at the same time you gain an iterative attack?
So in round 1 I might declare Power Attack and Dodge.(I cannot Cleave as I did not Power Attack the previous round). Then in round 2 I decide to Power Attack and Cleave. This means in Round 3 I can still use Cleave since I used Power Attack in Round 2.
I am going on an assumption that all combat feats must or at least should be declared at the beginning of the round. Since they last until the beginning of your next turn I see very little reson to use Dodge at the end of my turn (though you could I suppose if you only wanted the AC bonus in place while not your turn. Say you move first in your turn causing an AOO and don't want a bonus to AC because you have retributive strike prepared. Then you could turn on Dodge in mid turn or end of turn.)
Also, in this way as you reach a certain level you could then use Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot in the same round. And at the time you recieve another iterative attack giving you 3 attacks you could use 3 combat feats, so Dodge, Mobility and Spring Attack can be used in a single round.
Maybe this is too powerful for the style of game we are going for. Not sure, will have to playtest.
Eric.
I like the idea of combat feats being a little more powerful, and therefore only being able to use one in a round.
I hate the chaining effect to use them. Axe it. Not necessary, too complex and restrictive.
I don't like having to use a combat feat in the round preceding the use of another combat feat (e.g. power attack before cleave). At all.
First off, power attack has been nerfed enough as it is.
Secondly, and more generally, spring attack is not so powerful that you need to dodge then use mobility to be able to launch a spring attack on the third round. This feat chain becomes almost useless as the number of times i'll want to use spring attack will be very low. Also, using mobility means that you need to subject yourself to an AoO. So to spring attack, you must voluntarily first subject yourself to an AoO?! Makes no sense to me.
Finally, please try to keep the new rules simple. This requires keeping tabs on who uses what. Think about the poor DM that has several fighters or rogues to manage, in addition to keeping track of what his PCs do.
I am strongly against this rule.
Sky
|
|
Having not seen these playtested, I'm not a fan. These appear overly complex and there doesn't seem to to be a problem that's getting fixed, just another layer of things to keep track of.
Chaining these together doesn't make alot of sense to me. Spring Attack is a good example. You need to plan 2 rounds ahead to get a Spring Attack. Dodge now, Mobility, next round, and Spring Attack after that. That's alot of planning (not that I'm against planning), but planning that many rounds ahead is difficult in a non-static battlefield (one of the things everyone is clamoring for).
Put me in the "against" camp for this implementation.
-Skeld
|
I, too, have to cop to not having playtested them yet, but they are currently the only part of the Alpha that I am unreservedly not happy about. (The lack of skill points doesn't thrill me, but that's easily houseruled if I want to put it back, and free additional traind skills helps.) My first reaction upon reading them was that I had no interest in the subsequent feats in each chain - I was just going to buy Dodge and Arcane Strike and never go any further, because those were abilities on which I could rely. I approve of a more dynamic play style, but Combat Feats require serious reconsideration.
Its just too Limiting, Mobility tends to see a lot of use in the first round of battle, open a suprisie round, as someone vys to slip past defenders and hit a wizard or the like. No longer works as you have to dodge first.
My recommendation. Don't enforce it negitavely, 'you must do this' but positively 'if you use this feat in the turn following a use of [other feat] gain [bonus] encoraging players to set up combos and chains for the bonuses, not straight jacketing them as things stand.
Add me to the group that dont like this. the feats are fine just the combo's i hate
|
|
This seems needlessly complex. I like the idea of making combat more dynamic but this doesn't seem to be the way. A few of the chains seem interesting, especially Arcane Strike to Conduit Spell, most seem more trouble than they are worth. I will admit I am uncertain on how to make this work. Give me some time to mull it over.
Right now I can't foresee any of my players taking the time to build to these combos. Taking the time to build to an "uber-move" only to have it wasted because of the ever-changing nature of combat seems unsatisfying at best and down right frustrating at worst.
I can say I will try to out before rendering a final judgement.
|
|
Well I showed my group the rules. We discussed some of the changes. When we got to this, one of them seriously balked. His words were something like "I don't wanna waste my time on this crap. Let's play D&D." There were no positive opinions about it, and one neutral opinion from a woman who has never played a melee character before.
So, to find me some playtesters I will have to resort to the local game store.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
Yeah, I like the concept of these but the fact that it takes multiple rounds to set up the chains really irks me. In combat, everything changes so fast, I feel like I'd almost never get to use my "upper-level" moves.
Concept of chaining moves and feats = good
having to do things in order during combat = bad
Director of Games
|
Interesting thoughts everybody.
I have a question for the crowd. Is it the actual chaining that is a problem? -OR- Is it that some of the more common used familiar feats got put in a chain? -OR- Is it that you can only use one combat feat per round?
Or I guess, is it a combination of problems. If we removed one of the above, does the concept work better?
Let me know... I will share my specific thoughts later.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
the problem for me is u can only use one per round and u have to use one the round b4 that .
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
I have a question for the crowd. Is it the actual chaining that is a problem? -OR- Is it that some of the more common used familiar feats got put in a chain? -OR- Is it that you can only use one combat feat per round?
I think it's a problem of one feat per round, combined with the fact that completing chains takes multiple rounds. The Dodge/Mobility/Spring Attack chain is a perfect example: Why can't I use mobility on the first round? Why do I lose my Dodge bonus when Spring Attacking?
The Arcane Strike chain works better, but still takes 3 rounds to "power up". What if your blow in the first round kills that pesky Kobold, or whoever you just attacked runs away? You then lose the chance to complete the chain.
Also, I think the feats introduce the danger of making combat repetitive. If everyone just tries to fulfill their chains all the time, they'll be reluctant to try anything else. "Shoot the wizard; he's getting away!" "I can't; my Devastating Blow just powered up!"
I think there's some interesting ideas with these combat feats, but I think it needs more work. I like the idea of chaining feats, and trying to set up a sequence of moves, but some things, like the Dodge - Mobility - Spring Attack progression don't necessarily make sense as presented in the alpha rules. It might be kind of cool to have several options at any given stage of a chain, but that would probably get way too complicated.
I despise these particular changes. Certain feats like Power Attack, Dodge, Mobility, Cleave....are bedrocks for the 3.5 system. I see no backwards compatibility here.
I place a premium on 3.5/Pathfinder transparency and it will be the single most important factor on my decision to by into this system. Some of what you've done I can just cherry pick and put into my game where I want. This thing you've done with some of our most cherished feats is too extensive.
It requires extra work to convert. It changes combat dynamics quite a bit (and not in a good way). It's too limiting and not flexible.
Golly...I just don't like it at all. I agree with whathisname up above - this one I won't be using. Ever.
|
Ok I've given the Combat Feats a little bit of thought, a big problem with the combat feats seems to be the backwards compatibility of them as well as the time it takes to set them up as a result certain feats need to be shifted out of the combat feats section and the maneauvers should probably be in place of an attack (which then makes more of iterative attacks.)
OK on to the modifications.
Move Dodge, Mobility and Point Blank Shot to the feats section allowing them to be used all the time (ideally I'd lose dodge and start that tree with expertise but that might be a step too far.)
Change the conditional nature of the escalating tree's from a particular feat used to a specific circumstance e.g. Cleave can only be used while power attacking.
This circumstance can be applied by the previous feat in the chain giving a feeling of a style but isn't the be all and end all of the situation. Lets use the Dazzling Display chain as an example
Dazzling Display intimidates everyone on 30ft.
Stunned Defence causes an intimidated(shaken) foe to become flat footed. (This is linked specifically to your weapon focus which I'm not sure is required since I like the idea of setting up for the rogues sneak attack.)
Deadly Strike Causes double damage and a point of con damage to a flat footed opponent. (linked to Greater Weapon Focus which should keep the rogues away from the grab bag.)
This sets up the chain as an obvious combo without feeling quite so forced, as well as allows the character to exploit situations that crop up or even promote team work to set up the big hits.
Some of the escalating trees probably shouldn't be escalations.
Rapid Shot to Manyshot
Cleave to Great Cleave
Deft Shield to Shield Slam to Shield Master
Weapon Swap to Two Weapon Rend (should probable be Double Slice to Two Weapon Rend.)
Ok that should be all for now I think or this is going to get very long.
I do like the idea, that you can't dodge and power attack in the same round, but the multi-round maneuvers don't work for me either.
|
|
I have a question for the crowd. Is it the actual chaining that is a problem? -OR- Is it that some of the more common used familiar feats got put in a chain? -OR- Is it that you can only use one combat feat per round?
Ok, first let me state that I like the idea of Combat Feats. Feats that are more powerful than "normal" Feats because they only work in certain situations.
- The chaining is no problem for me. To be realy effective, you have to invest. In case of Combat Feats it is a Feat Chain.
- Common Feats put in a Chain? It depends and I will have to see how it affects PC building.
- Using only one Feat per round? Definetly for some Feats that does not make sense or diminishes the worth of the Feats. Some other Feats might need this as a balancing mechanism (in 3.5 Manyshot and Rapid Shot can not be used together, but that is fine). So to answer you: It depends from feat to feat.
But I have an idea how to make these Feats easier to use:
Combat Feat should have "triggers" that have to be met before they can be used. One common trigger is "denied his ability bonus" and triggers sneak attack. Or the trigger for cleave in 3.5. etc. These triggers do not have to conditions of the enemy but can also be of the Feat user or his allies.
For example (just a Feat out of my head): Bring him down too: if you begin your turn prone, you may make a trip attack as a standard action against an adjacant enemy. This Trip attack does not occur an AoO and you receive a +5 bonus to the opposed strength check.
The Trigger can also be a specific weapon or weapon group. This might help for example to make Daggers a feasible weapon for a fighter.
For example: Sudden Strike: If you have a Dagger readied, you may make an extra melee Attack in a surprise round at your highest attack bonus.
A spell counts as a weapon too of course!
And lastly, the trigger might be the PC race. Elven grace, Dwarven stoutness and Orcish Fury can be meaningfull Feats, only available to certain races.
To sum it up:
Triggers can be
- Conditions
- Weapons or Weapon groups
- Race of PC
|
|
Interesting thoughts everybody.
I have a question for the crowd. Is it the actual chaining that is a problem? -OR- Is it that some of the more common used familiar feats got put in a chain? -OR- Is it that you can only use one combat feat per round?
Or I guess, is it a combination of problems. If we removed one of the above, does the concept work better?
The issue for me comes down to reliability. Even with extra feats, I don't have any interest in wasting character building resources on things I can't be sure I'll get to use regularly. The combat feat concept violates that idea two ways - the chains mean that later abilities are less likely to be utilized (and this is particularly bad with three step chains), and the mutually exclusive clause means that I have to sacrifice one ability to use another. Together, these mean I simply don't buy up the chains - then I have an ability I can use all the time, and no worries about whether I am willing, let alone able, to use something else in its place.
I will say this, though - I would be far more willing to consider chains as "bonus" powers if I didn't lose access to the other feats as well. So the exclusivity is a deeper problem for me than the chains are.
First up, Chains of feats, are a nice idea, needs more work though.
Chaining feats takes too long, 3 rounds to *possibly* use late tier feats? Ive seen climax battles not last that long. It interrupts the flow of some feats like Mobility or Spring attack, not good. This makes the late tier feats very costly feat wise, for relitavely little gain.
Theres the backwards computability effect, I don't mind bread and butter feats being the start of chains, but as it stands Pathfinder mobility is a very different beast to 3.5 mobility, the impact on tactics, PRCs and the like could be bad.
Lastly the use of 1 combat feet a round will severely alter the utility of feats like Improved trip and the like, mostly serving to weaken full Bab classes as well as making it potently harder to use feats from other 3.5 publications penned without that assumption in place, harder.
Hmm..Maybe it should be per attack instead of per round? So feats that take 3 rounds to activate instead take 3 attacks to activate?
I have a problem with just about all of the Combat Feats section.
First, a one of the fighter's only strengths is that he can use multiple sets of feats at a time because he has enough feats to do so. For example, a paladin can progress along the Power Attack feat chain or along the Mounted Combat feat chain, and a rogue can take the Combat Expertise chain or the Dodge chain. The fighter, however, can make better use out of all of the feats because he has enough feats to take two or even three chains. The fighter's strength comes from the fact that he can simultaneously Spring Attack and Power Attack or Spring Attack and Improved Trip. By limiting the number of Combat feats one can use in a round in any arbitrary way, you take away the only real strength of the fighter class. The only way that the number of feats you use in a round should be limited is by the number of actions you have (i.e. I can't use Power Attack and Improved Trip and Spring Attack in a round because I only get 1 attack if I Spring Attack).
Second, as has been said, the arbitrary chaining takes too long. If it takes 3 rounds Spring Attack, I probably can't use it. Any possible chaining should be based on conditions in combat, as a previous poster said. These conditions could be based on the "stance" a combatant is in (i.e. If I want to Cleave, I need to be using Power Attack. If I want to use Improved Trip, I need to be using Combat Expertise). These conditions could also be more standard, ala "If an opponent is flat-footed, you can use this feat." This style encourages chaining of feats in combat while not requiring it--if an opponent is already flat-footed, I can use my feat that requires that condition without having to use my feat to make him so. This also encourages teamwork, one of the positive aspects of 4th edition's design philosophy, by allowing players to combo off of each other (the fighter uses a stunning feat so that the rogue can sneak attack, for example).
Most of the pre-existing feats don't fit well into the chaining structure. The new feats, the Arcane Strike chain for example, do because they were designed to fit. Trying to retrofit sound mechanics to fit a new system probably won't work.
If there is to be a Combat feats mechanic as written, completely new feats need to be made for it or the existing feats need to be heavily modified and combined. As it stands, Dodge+Mobility+Spring Attack or Power Attack+Cleave+Knockback+Stunning Blow might be good feats to which I am limited to using one per round.
Third, this rule is much more punishing to some players than to others. Only fighter-types will really be affected by this rule--casters don't use combat feats enough for it to really matter to them. These rules really only make the fighters' lives more difficult. Also, even with the changes to the casters presented, any of mid to high level can easily outdo the fighters in combat effect. A wizard still swings the tide of combat more than any fighter could. This rule only makes that problem worse.
In summary, the rule as a whole either needs to be dropped or made into a new system which exists in addition to the standard feats system, possibly as a class feature of fighters, with its own set of new very powerful options.
|
I agree. Having to this feat this round and that feat next round to use the really good feat on round 3 is overly complicated and hinders characters with these feats. Jason, I ask you to strongly consider changing these chain feats to the way similar feats are presented in the PHB. Just having the prerequiste ability scores, BAB, and feats should be enough. You shouldn't have to use dodge one round, mobility the next round, to use spring attack the third round. The enemy you wanted to use it on might have moved or be dead or incapitated by then. It may sound like it lets players think tactically, but in the end it just doesn't work.
Interesting thoughts everybody.
I have a question for the crowd. Is it the actual chaining that is a problem? -OR- Is it that some of the more common used familiar feats got put in a chain? -OR- Is it that you can only use one combat feat per round?
Or I guess, is it a combination of problems. If we removed one of the above, does the concept work better?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
This was one of the things my playgroup really disliked
I think its partly all three of thouse things
Chaining dont like at all
Common feats now stuck in here is really bad
What about with these combat feats you can use only once per turn be super good feats and as you advance in level you can use more of them based on your base attack (so the fighter gets a little more of a buff)per turn