Please add to the Prone condition definition that "you may only attack/threaten opponents with a light melee weapon". The reasons for not using a larger weapon are the same as for not using a bow - you just need to be able to maneuver better, which is not possible on your back.
I've seen too many fights in D&D (at high levels, especially) when a target is tripped and finds it acceptable to just take the penalties and fight from prone with a big weapon. Tripping someone is hard, and it should have hard consequences.
-Scott
Please add to the Prone condition definition that "you may only attack/threaten opponents with a light melee weapon". The reasons for not using a larger weapon are the same as for not using a bow - you just need to be able to maneuver better, which is not possible on your back.
I've seen too many fights in D&D (at high levels, especially) when a target is tripped and finds it acceptable to just take the penalties and fight from prone with a big weapon. Tripping someone is hard, and it should have hard consequences.
-Scott
Not a bad idea!
It is also coherent with the 3.5 grapple rule. Attacking while grappling is only unarmed, natural weapon or light weapon.
|
SRD
Prone
The character is on the ground. An attacker who is prone has a -4 penalty on melee attack rolls and cannot use a ranged weapon (except for a crossbow). A defender who is prone gains a +4 bonus to Armor Class against ranged attacks, but takes a -4 penalty to AC against melee attacks.
Standing up is a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity.
It seems that the penalties to attack and to AC are already quite severe.
Why is there no rules for simpling crawling away?
|
|
SRD
Crawling
You can crawl 5 feet as a move action. Crawling incurs attacks of opportunity from any attackers who threaten you at any point of your crawl.
The penalties are severe, but for CR 11-17 monsters, they tend to fade to being just a nuissance. Taking the pelalty in order to get a full attack routine is pretty common, and not in keeping with the flavor of being prone.
The penalties for being prone do not scale with encounter level, so hard-hitting monsters with reach are barely affected.
|
|
The reasons for not using a larger weapon are the same as for not using a bow - you just need to be able to maneuver better, which is not possible on your back.
-Scott
This is already assumed to be the case - hence the -4 to your attack rolls. Compile that with a -4 to AC, a move action required to stand (preventing full-attack actions), and such movement provoking and AoO is punitive enough. I dont see restricting the weapon to light only as being necessary.
Robert
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
There are rules for crawling. Damn beaten to it!
Crawling
You can crawl 5 feet as a move action. Crawling incurs attacks of opportunity from any attackers who threaten you at any point of your crawl.
And the penalties to being prone are already bad enough.
There are rules for crawling. Damn beaten to it!
Crawling
You can crawl 5 feet as a move action. Crawling incurs attacks of opportunity from any attackers who threaten you at any point of your crawl.And the penalties to being prone are already bad enough.
Thanks guys. Derro go crawl to my corner.
I would say using a reach weapon might be hard to do from prone, like a ranseur or other polearm. But short of the already existing -4, even a greatsword or greataxe is not that hard to swing from prone.
If anything, light weapons are even more worthless while prone, as most have significantly less "reach" than most 1 and 2-handed weapons, and usually involve more deceptive attack patterns that require more freedom of movement.
Here, we can go into the big dark box of thinking to solve this!
Now that we're in the box, we can think "big weapons need more manuverability! give them a penalty when prone!"
Then we can think "small weapons don't have as much reach! give them a penalty when prone!"
Then we can listen to the magic of the big dark box of thinking say to us: "Lo, you hath found both small and big weapon doth need a penalty when used from prone! Now accept mine accross-thy-board -4 when prone, and doth move thyself on to something else!"
I don't allow Power Attacks by prone combatants, nor the use of Combat Exertise or the duelist's elaborate parry. Is that overly harsh of me?
|
|
I don't allow Power Attacks by prone combatants, nor the use of Combat Exertise or the duelist's elaborate parry. Is that overly harsh of me?
I can see both sides of the arguement.
But then again, like Black Bard was illustrating - sometimes the reality and real-world thinking of things just adds to much or takes too much away.
While I can understand and envision finding it harder to Power Attack (if we imagine physics and center of gravity), or combat expertise (if we imagine physics and harder to move graceful and defensive), it simply opens the door for too much real-world physics to affect the balance of the game - and then the balance is tipped.
So while I see you having a point from a logistical standpoint, I see it as another penalty for being prone - which in and of itself is already horribly punitive
Robert
I'd envisioned a feat that would let you use your other feats while prone -- sort of like the guy in the old kung-fu movie who specifically trains in the style of fighting on his back.
Perhaps we can consult Heidi Fleiss in what all movements are plausible from the back.
Right. Perform (or is it Profession?) checks might even get a circumstance bonus.
The prone penalties already include such "real-world" penalties by limiting your firing of a bow. What is the reason for doing this, if not to demonstrate that the bow is too large and unweildy to use from a prone position? Why wouldn't a greatsword, spiked chain, or two-bladed axe suffer the same way?
Being prone has penalties, but these do not scale well. They just don't mean as much to a CR 11 creature as they do to a CR 1 creature, and my suggestion is that they should. By limiting your weapon selection while prone, this scales better IMO.
I know I'll get flak for this, but I think that it should be specified in the prone condition that the -4 penalty also applies to your Combat Maneuvers.
-Scott