Not sure if this is an intentional change or not, but Spring Attack now draws no attacks of opportunity for movement. It used to be that by using the feat you would only negate AoO's from the defender.
This means that a character can now waltz through a mob of enemies without fear of attacks as long as he takes a swing at one of them along the way.
There seems to be way too much abuse potential with this. Any thoughts? Did I miss something about the reasoning behind this along the way?
As a Combat Feat maybe Jason felt it needed an upgrade to make it worthwhile (since you can only use 1 combat feat per round), but I haven't seen any commentary on it. Another reason may be just to simplify it.
I'd like to see Dodge, Mobility, and Spring Attack changed back to their 3.5 versions as non-Combat feats with the original strengths and limitations (+4 to AC with Mobility, and only the target of the Spring Attack doesn't gain AoO).
Not sure if this is an intentional change or not, but Spring Attack now draws no attacks of opportunity for movement. It used to be that by using the feat you would only negate AoO's from the defender.
This means that a character can now waltz through a mob of enemies without fear of attacks as long as he takes a swing at one of them along the way.
Likewise, the feat Mobility allows you to ignore all attacks of opportunity provoked by moving (so the change is intentional, I think). They're certainly much better; I thought they were a little underpowered before, but I could be wrong.
So, Pathfinder A3 sticks with 1 CM/round, but rolls the benfits of Mobility into Spring Attack specifically to circumvent that rule without abandoning it altogether? I guess that could work.
|
How can negating attacks of opportunity be justified?
I mean if someone is moving past someone they get an AoO.
So why would this person be unable to swing, stab or whatever just because someone has a feat that negates them? Does the guy use up his AoO for the round and it's an automatic miss?
I think this is too powerful. there was nothing wrong with those feats the way they were before. Well maybe Dodge kinda sucked, but the others were fine.
How can negating attacks of opportunity be justified?
I mean if someone is moving past someone they get an AoO.
So why would this person be unable to swing, stab or whatever just because someone has a feat that negates them?
I'd say it's just like casting a spell defensively; you're doing the same action that would normally provokes an AoO, but you're doing it very, very carefully so you don't provide an opening in your guard.
That's how I see it working as well. You're talking about a nimble opponent that isn't giving you the opportunity, in the same way that an Acrobatics roll would allow you to move without provoking an attack.
My rogue is working up to the Spring Attack feat, I believe. If so, we'll see how it holds up in a playtest. (Although the other option is to manufacture an NPC with it and see how my players react...) In any event, readying attacks against the approach of a Spring Attacker is still a valid combat option, and one that the feat cannot negate.