|
Well my initial thougt was the same on lowering the dificulty on these. But after thinking it should not be easy for two equal opponents to disarm/trip/etc each other. So I think the 15+CMB is probably fine.
Yes I do like the grapple mechanic and think that this could be used for the other combat manuevers.
If there can be one unified table for all the maneuvers, I think the staging effect works.
0-4 margin: One small effect, same for all stunts
5-9 margin: Basic effect of the stunt (disarm, hold, fall prone etc)
10+ margin: Basic effect plus some bonus, same for alls tunts (could be the same as the 0-4 bonus above).
I like the idea of having 'staged' benefits... wasting your action on just succeeding or just failing is no fun, and makes players feel like they are not getting a chance to be useful.
Lowering the DC to 10+CMB sounds good, especially if there were staged successes... perhaps for disarm with 10+ success, you could catch the weapon? That's always fun for anyone who's watched The Princess Bride.
It seems that some are already scaled (Like Bulls rush) but it's not as clearly written as the Grapple Rules
Bull Rush
DC = 5 feet
DC +5 = 10 Feet
DC +10 = 15 Feet
DC +15 = 20 Feet
I think Disarm COULD work nicely as
DC = Small/Light item (Potion bottle, Holy symbol)
DC +5 = Light/Small Weapon
DC +10 = Medium Weapon
DC +15 = Heavy Weapon
Weapons being used 2 handed get a +2 to there CMB
OR
Weapons (Items) being used 2 handed get Treated one higher on the DC Chart
just an idea
Overrun
DC = "Clipped" (-2 to AC)
DC +5 = "Unbalanced" (Flat Footed)
DC +10 = "Flattened" (Prone)*
DC +15 = "Knock back" ( Prone, moved 5 feet)
"Flattened" = Move action to get up
"Knock back = Full round action to recover and get to you feet
Director of Games
|
Hey there all,
When doing some of the math on the CMB issues, it became apparent that 10+CMB created a similar problem to the one we face in 3.5. That is that wizards (and other spellcasters) get "owned" by grapple, as it nearly always worked and they could rarely escape (I know there are ways, but in many cases, this was a big problem, I have seen a lich pummeled to death while grappled in an antimagic shell, it made me very sad). Putting it up at 15 made it a bit more of a challenge, but still keeps it well within reach for characters who want to specialize.
As for scaling effects. It works for some (imo) but not for others which are far more binary (you are either tripped/disarmed or your not).
That said, I am open to thoughts (as always).
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Hey there all,
When doing some of the math on the CMB issues, it became apparent that 10+CMB created a similar problem to the one we face in 3.5. That is that wizards (and other spellcasters) get "owned" by grapple, as it nearly always worked and they could rarely escape (I know there are ways, but in many cases, this was a big problem, I have seen a lich pummeled to death while grappled in an antimagic shell, it made me very sad). Putting it up at 15 made it a bit more of a challenge, but still keeps it well within reach for characters who want to specialize.
As for scaling effects. It works for some (imo) but not for others which are far more binary (you are either tripped/disarmed or your not).
That said, I am open to thoughts (as always).
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Your grapple rules are similar to my house rules -though I used 10 I agree 15 is better. I removed any size modifier as I considered it too dominant- though I like your more normal size modifier effect- I am not sure I like the idea of going straight to pinned in one attack-- will try and see.
I tried to give grapplers a few attack options after success but hadn't figured out what to do with pinned - I want giants to pick up people and throw them away :)
Here are my houserules based from 3.5:
Draft grapple rules
Definitions
Grapple AC: 10 + BAB + higher of dex or str bonus (+4 if has improved grab or improved grapple) or escape artist skill
Grabber: person attempting to grapple
Grabbed: person being grappled
Grapple roll: BAB + str bonus +1d20 (+4 if have improved grab or improved grapple)
Grapple check: Grapple roll vs. grapple ac of opponent
Commencing a grapple
1. Touch attack provoking attack of opportunity (unless have improved grapple)
2. If grappler hit by attack of opportunity add damage done to grapple AC
3. Grabber makes grapple roll vs. grapple AC (-4 if only using 1 hand)
4. If successful grabbed is considered entangled and unable to move unless it is 2 or more sizes larger than grabber in which case it might not have noticed
Once Grabbed grabber and grabbed have no concealment vs. each other. Though firing missiles at a person in grapple will have a chance to hit either target (50/50 if same size, 80/20 if 1 size different, 90/10 if 2 or more size different)
What can do while grabbed
1. attack normally (additional penalties -2 if weapon not light, -4 if weapon 2 handed)
2. cast spell (will have to roll concentration check for entangled as well as provoke attack of opportunity- so may roll twice) – if the spell has a somatic component the entangle concentration check will not be 15 but will be 15 or the higher of 10 + grabbers BAB + str bonus
3. break grapple : grapple roll vs. grapple ac, (this may be part of a full round action attack with subsequent rolls being at -5)
4. grab back: grapple roll vs. grapple ac but don’t take penalty for being entangled
5. other actions such as drink a potion, etc all can be done normally but will provoke an attack of opportunity
What can the grabber do?
1. attack normally same penalties as if grabbed (but not entangled)
2. cast a spell as grabbee but not entangled
3. release grapple as a free action
4. throw if larger than grabbed: grapple check to succeed, release grapple, move 10’ per size category difference, grabbed takes 1d6 per 10’ thrown (double this if strikes an object before travelled full distance) and must make a reflex save or be prone DC grapple check of the throw
5. trip: grapple check if succeed grabbed becomes prone (still grabbed)
6. swallow (only certain monsters): grapple check
7. constrict: grapple check damage 1d6+1.5str (for medium)
8. move: grapple check if succeed may move a single move (may do this no more than 1 per turn) (automatic as a free action if 2 sizes larger)
Nb: throw, trip, swallow, constrict move may all be part of a full round action. I.e. if a creature has a BAB of +11 it may try to constrict, then swallow, then try and swallow again if it fails the first time.
Hey there all,
When doing some of the math on the CMB issues, it became apparent that 10+CMB created a similar problem to the one we face in 3.5. That is that wizards (and other spellcasters) get "owned" by grapple, as it nearly always worked and they could rarely escape (I know there are ways, but in many cases, this was a big problem, I have seen a lich pummeled to death while grappled in an antimagic shell, it made me very sad). Putting it up at 15 made it a bit more of a challenge, but still keeps it well within reach for characters who want to specialize.
As for scaling effects. It works for some (imo) but not for others which are far more binary (you are either tripped/disarmed or your not).
That said, I am open to thoughts (as always).
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
I think it should stay at 15 + CMB. As a DM of a Monk that loves to grapple things. As far as the scaling effect. maybe as it was suggested by Stalker0- with Disarm, how far the weapon/item flies across the room (images of Indiana Jones comes to mind). and as far as Trip maid playing with how bad you just landed on you face, maybe inflecting effect like "Dazed" or something for doing really well.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16
|
If the DC for any combat maneuver is a set number (15 + the target's CMB), why not front load the math into character creation/leveling and have a stat called Combat Maneuver Defense(CMD) that is listed right on the character sheet?
That way when someone attempts a Combat Maneuver against you it is already calculated. If you have a bonus against a specific maneuver, such as a dwarf with stability, it can be listed separately like this:
CMD: 18, 22 vs trip or bullrush
What do you all think?
If the DC for any combat maneuver is a set number (15 + the target's CMB), why not front load the math into character creation/leveling and have a stat called Combat Maneuver Defense(CMD) that is listed right on the character sheet?
That way when someone attempts a Combat Maneuver against you it is already calculated. If you have a bonus against a specific maneuver, such as a dwarf with stability, it can be listed separately like this:
CMD: 18, 22 vs trip or bullrush
What do you all think?
Yeah totally
the CMB should be listed just like AC
|
I have to agree with adding a Defense option onto a character sheet. Though it is one more thing a player has to keep track of, it saves the time needed to try and figure it out has you go along.
I liked the CMBs approach to handling size and it works well with the DC 15+ mechanic. I will be glad to try these mechanics in my game tonight.
|
|
I have a small playtest report for you all to examine. It can be found on this thread.
Grapple in Practice
|
|
I think the system works as it is now. The Dc 16 in your case is not so easy for a 1st level fighter to do much to you. Lets assume he has 15 Str so he would have a CMB + 3 The highest number he could reach is a 23 and since that is only a max of 5 over, you wouldn't be held immobile. You could still cast spells at him or attack him. If that fighter was an Orc, he would have a CMB + 5 and could still only do the same. The system works nicely. Now if those fighters were 4th level, they should be able to grapple you a little better and could possibly pin you at some point.
|
|
Well if you look at the system now, the dex fighters are always at a disadvantange as it is. The only opposed check that they could avoid is a Trip. Everything else is strength based. I don't think Bull Rush, a character slamming into you attempting to push you back, would work with dex. What could the Dex fighter do against the opponents strength? Step out of the way is the only option I could see if he is not strong enough. Wizards are not trained in combat so they should be more easily grappled and such. Some do brake the mould, but those ones have higher strengths and possibly a level of fighter.
Well if you look at the system now, the dex fighters are always at a disadvantange as it is. The only opposed check that they could avoid is a Trip. Everything else is strength based. I don't think Bull Rush, a character slamming into you attempting to push you back, would work with dex. What could the Dex fighter do against the opponents strength? Step out of the way is the only option I could see if he is not strong enough. Wizards are not trained in combat so they should be more easily grappled and such. Some do brake the mould, but those ones have higher strengths and possibly a level of fighter.
I guess part of my point is that, as is, the system makes little sense. An agile opponent should be able to effectively side-step a bullrush instead of trying to try to resist with brute strength. Seriously, if you're batman and Superman is charging towards you, do you just stay still and try to resist, or do you sidestep it? Thus, why isn't sidestep an option (represented by using Dex); or if someone is grappling to squirm out of it rather than to engage in an arm wrestling competition? Or if someone is going to disarm, why not use your agility to avoid the attempt rather than hold firm on the weapon and hope you can overpower them?
I'm not saying that wizards should be the greatest combatants ever... but that's represented in their BAB in the CMB, right? But as far as natural ability to evade or resist, that'd be Str. or Dex. In my example, the switch from Str. to Dex is a difference of 5 to the CMB... not a huge number, but enough to show that between natural ability and some combat experience, the 9th level wizard can be a little harder to pin down than others.
If you're going to the effort of redoing the grapple/trip/disarm stuff, then I see no problems with revising rule issues that make no sense.
|
|
Escape Artist the skill is the only Dex based thing that can get you out of a grapple. Other than that, if you watch Olympic style wrestling, you notice that even though even has some agility, they are trying more to use strength to press their opponent. In your example of Batman and Superman, if Superman was going to Bull Rush you, for one you wouldn't have the time to sidestep and two, he could make the sleightest of changes and still hit Batman. Look at a Bull, it takes a matador years to find a way to sidestep a Bull and usually it's through deception, hence the cloak. I could even say a Tackle is like a bull rush. Once the player gets close enough, sidestepping is not truly an option since your opponent has arms and is trained to watch you so he rarely fails. I can see your argument as an attempt to equal the playing field but Strength is usually the only way to get past someone.
In SW Saga it's Dex or Str, whichever is higher... and I've not encountered any problems with that arrangement.
As for doing this via a feat... if the goal is to give wizards and rogues a bit more of a chance to avoid the grapple situation, then you're requiring that they spend one of 7 feats on that (assuming 1-20). Does it really need that kind of character resources to give dex based characters a better shot at avoiding a grapple/disarm/bull rush/trip? It never struck me that this was an integral part of the game balance to require characters to only oppose those things with brute force. I figured it was more due to the designers not watching too many pass-reciever types slip out of tackles.
I guess I don't see myself as a wizard taking that feat over spell focus, a metamagic feat, or other feats that go to the primary purpose of a wizard (casting)... and then just hoping that I can survive the grapple long enough to cast a spell to get out of it.
As a dex-based fighter... you're going to spend 1 feat just for weapon finesse already. So you're already at a disadvantage to str. based fighters.
|
First of all, bravo on your attempts to clean up and standardize the various combat maneuvers. I like the basic mechanic of a CMB number very much.
Agreed. I love that they all operate similarly.
I'd like to see CMB be be based on either Str or Dex,whichever is higher, or maybe even Str and Dex both, that way you couldn't totally hide a weakness in one with a high score in the other. (With a feat like Agile Maneuvers you could use Dex x2 instead of Str+Dex, and with Brute Force you could add Str x2).
I'm not a number wiz but it seems to me that even though using both ability scores would elevate CMBs, it would do so across the board, and thus fairly.
Also, as a player, having a CMB Defense number on my character sheet would be helpful.
I just thought I would pop on here and note the Agile Maneuvers feat found on page 32 which allows you to use your Dex instead of your Strength when calculating your CMB.
Does that solve the Dex-based issue?
Please continue with the discussion.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Funny, we just had this conversation at the end of the our second playtest session last night.
My group's consenus was that a character/monster should be able to choose to use either their str or dex mod to calculate their CMB. It is after all a combat maneuver bonus, not a combat strength bonus.
I hadn't noticed the feat (we're waiting for the R2 release before we try feats), but it doesn't seem fair that Dex based characters have to burn a feat to get Weapon Finesse and then have to burn another feat to use their Dex mod in the CMB calculation.
Under the 3.5 base system, only 1 manuever requires Strength (Bull's Rush). Trip and Overrun allow either Str or Dex for the opposed roll. (Disarm & Sunder are opposed attack rolls and don't really come into it).
|
Director of Games
|
Hey there all,
I can understand the desire to work your Dex modifier into the equation, but we are sticking with Str (for the time being) because it allows the CMB to be relatively close to your current Grapple modifier. The only change you have to make is if you are not size Medium.
That said, please continue with the discussion. I am listening.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Under the 3.5 base system, only 1 manuever requires Strength (Bull's Rush). Trip and Overrun allow either Str or Dex for the opposed roll. (Disarm & Sunder are opposed attack rolls and don't really come into it).
That is not right. Only the defender can choose to use his Dex modifier for the opposed roll. The attacker not.
I like the CMB rules.
Under the 3.5 base system, only 1 manuever requires Strength (Bull's Rush). Trip and Overrun allow either Str or Dex for the opposed roll. (Disarm & Sunder are opposed attack rolls and don't really come into it).
That is not right. Only the defender can choose to use his Dex modifier for the opposed roll. The attacker not.
I like the CMB rules.
True. But they do have the option of using their Dex on the defensive end of things. CMB is wholly tied to STR and while I can understand wanting it to approximate grappling, it seems like a better solution to allow either/or to be used to calculate their CMB bonus (without burning a feat).
I like the idea of a dextrous character being more difficult to grapple/bullrush/trip/disarm/overrun. To my mind it makes more sense and takes the overreliance on high strength scores out of the equation. Why shouldn't a nimble character be better able to resist the previously mentioned maneuvers?
I just want to make sure I understand this...
Bull Rush in 3.5 was opposed str. checks - now it's BAB+Str, so a slight change, with the +15 to the defender.
Disarm - in 3.5 this was an opposed attack roll. So for a dex fighter, that's BAB+Dex v. Defender's attack roll (BAB+Str or Dex). Now, a dex based fighter makes a disarm check as a BAB+Str, or sacrafices 2 feats to gain the same bonus as under 3.5... for a Rogue to be into disarming, that'd be 3 feats under Alpha, where it was 2 feats under 3.5 (Wpn Finesse, and Improved Disarm). Thus, a non-human rogue is going to need to wait until level 6 to do a trick as well as a level 3 non-human rogue under 3.5. This doesn't strike me as "backward compatable".
Grapple - 3.5 it's opposed strength, now it's opposed strength +BAB. I still see this as screwing the casters and dex based fighters, although it does simplify the grapple rules some.
Trip - 3.5 this was Str. v. Dex or Str., now it Str+BAB v. Str+BAB. Again, dex based characters get the shaft.
If one mechanic is going to be used for all of these maneuvers, it seems that they should still work roughly the same as the maneuvers did in 3.5.
Perhaps the best solution would be to modify weapon finesse to allow a dex based fighter to use their dex or strength for the CMB. This won't help casters, but will at least allow a dex based fighter who wants to be a disarming specialist the ability to do so with the same amount of resources as before (2 feats).
|
|
I just thought I would pop on here and note the Agile Maneuvers feat found on page 32 which allows you to use your Dex instead of your Strength when calculating your CMB.
Does that solve the Dex-based issue?
Please continue with the discussion.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Not to my satisfaction.
I feel it should be based upon Str or Dex. In the case of grapple, Dex is the target being able to squirm out before the strong fighter can get a grip.
It means a wizard with a 16 Dex and 8 Str has to burn a feat to improve his ability to escape grappling.
Disarm should not be based upon Str only, in fact when you learn to fence you're taught to hold the weapon lightly, you don't attempt to hold onto it with all your might as that will just jar it loose with any impact.
Trip traditionally was a contested roll of either dex or str.
I dislike the current CMB, but would easily house-rule it to be dex or str.