|
I will admit that I am not sold on the exact math; thinking 15 is too high; but the overall concept of CMB is fantastic.
I find it quick, easy, smooth, and above all very universal.
I wanted to use this thread for DMs and players to post ideas of things they've tried out in a game or considered trying via the CMB mechanic that falls outside the box (not the standard use of grapple, disarm, trip etc).
I'll start:
This past weekend the PCs stood in a doorway fighting. I had an NPC slam the door into a character to "knock him back" out of the doorway. This provoked an AoO that hit - which the damage spoiled the CMB attempt.
The previous weekend, during a fight in the streets of Kaer Maga (using the Seven Swords of sin module), a gang of rogues jumped the PCs.
Two rogues jumped from rooftops, grabbed onto the banners that span across the street, and swung into the PCs trying to knock a couple of them down. This would have provoked an AoO, but the rogues won the initiative. Both were successful - knocking over the female Chelaxian wizard, and the male gnome cleric.
During that same fight one rogue fighting on the ground pushed a cart of fruit into the swashbuckler to overrun him. He couldn't be reached for a AoO. The rogue failed miserably however.
The swashbuckler jumped up on the cart and was fighting off the rogues from above. One of the rogues kicked the cart causing it to move in an attempt to knock the swashbuckler down into the cart. The swashbuckler did not yet have the feat to use the DEX mod, and the attempt was successful.
Three weeks ago, a PC jumped up on top of a table in the bar while they were being 'jumped' by assassins (not the PrC - just their role) paid to kill them. While the Swashbuckler PC was on the table, the female rogue NPC moved towards the table, slid under it for cover and then kicked one end of the table up to tip over the PC. She succeeded in knocking him down to the ground - where the NPC fighter made a meal out of the poor prone PC.
These a just a few of the number of things I think can be resolved using the CMB. My players are loving the added elements of fun and action that we're using and we enjoy that theres now an easy way to resolve it all.
Anyone else have ideas they've tried?
Robert
|
|
I have had it used a few times in it's normal incarnation (trip, etc). But hadn't thought to use it outside of that.
Thanks for opening my eyes to the world of possibilities using the CMB mechanic, it is a great thing to bring more excitement into the game.
Well, thats pretty much why I posted it - I saw early on the possibilities and ease it could be applied to it - but then as I talked to people they hadn't yet thought of these kinds of things.
So I figured I'd start by illustrating some that I've used to generate the creative thinking and we can share a whole host of in-game uses for it; essentially anytime one is pitting their mettle directly against another that doesn't fall into the category of a BAB vs AC.
Another idea I was going to us during that bar fight - but it never came up:
Someone swiging the chandalier to knock someone off the balcony - it could be ridden swinging the character into the target where I would give it a +2, or just be swung by itself in hopes of knocking the guy over.
Either way - its just using ones combative strength and abilities against another.
Theres bound to be dozens of more applications. The more we share the more ideas that info will spark.
Robert
|
|
Had a PC who wanted to jump into the mouth of a Mother of Oblivion. Used CMB, lacking any better ideas. (He rolled a nat 20.)
Next session, same PC (who is Small) wanted to run up the polearm of the Large creature they were fighting to hit it in the face. Again, CMB, followed by Acrobatics (for balance).
(shrug) Not sure either was really appropriate, but it was nice to have something to offer...
I have a player that would do it. He had a Barbarian jump on top of a beholder once...
|
|
Had a PC who wanted to jump into the mouth of a Mother of Oblivion. Used CMB, lacking any better ideas. (He rolled a nat 20.)Who tries to jump into the mouth of something called a "Mother of Oblivion?"
He was looking for a way to overcome its ludicrous natural armor. Since he actually managed the CMB check, I let him start making touch attacks, which might well have saved the party. Damn near killed him, though.
So far I’ve had: Slamming a door on a snake (flat-footed so no AoO and it’s kind of hard to open a door without limbs), pushing a goblin in thorny bushes (missed AoO) and snagging an imp with a whip before it goes invisible and flies away (reach of the whip prevented the AoO). I homebrewed a ”Snag” maneuver based on the Alpha1 grapple, posted on New rules suggestions, my players seem to like it.
I feel most of the non-“I hit it with my weapon” stuff seems to be easily manageable with the CMB and that make combats a lot more fun, specially if the players like to try different stuff.
|
What a great post idea!
Over the past few months, CMB has been used more by me (the DM) than the players, but they're catching on.
I had goblins miserably try to push a fighter off a roof. I diarmed one of the PCs who had grabbed a dogslicer.
A large carrion crawler was able to grab the halfling and swing him around to its other side 15 feet away - that was cool.
A few PCs are more apt to try overrun and bull rush now, more than before.
Overall, as a DM, I feel pretty good with the CMB system - it feels open enough to interpretation to be a simple handy tool. I am, however, aware of other posts in this forum that raise some astute eyebrows of concern. I agree that CMB needs a bit of tweaking.
These are amazing ideas that simply had not crossed my mind. This is a much more flexible system than the old one, where certain issues always left me trying to randomly adjudicate them or having to just say "there's no good way of doing that." I'll have to remember this for when I start running a PRPG game after the Beta is released.
|
|
These are amazing ideas that simply had not crossed my mind. This is a much more flexible system than the old one, where certain issues always left me trying to randomly adjudicate them or having to just say "there's no good way of doing that." I'll have to remember this for when I start running a PRPG game after the Beta is released.
Thanks Sakura.
Two other things that I came up with:
Yank a rug out from under a creature, knocking it to the ground.
Tip a statue over onto someone, either knocking them to ground, or even pinning him depending on the level of success of the CMB.
Its also a good way to resolve a creature's trample ability.
Robert
|
|
These are amazing ideas that simply had not crossed my mind. This is a much more flexible system than the old one, where certain issues always left me trying to randomly adjudicate them or having to just say "there's no good way of doing that." I'll have to remember this for when I start running a PRPG game after the Beta is released.
Really, I always thought the system of touch attacks and opposed rolls was pretty quick and easy to adjudicate on the spot, maybe that's just cause of my DM style, but I can see having one always unified mechanic will make it good for everyone.
I like the ease of use, but I still think the 15 is too high for at least some of the basic combat maneuvers. Also, I understand that they're aiming CMB to be a general tool for cool maneuvers, in the ways suggested in this thread, but I wonder whether strength is always the appropriate ability modifier. Technically, under 3.X rules, you could just have made the character make an arguably relevant skill or attribute check to swing on a chandelier or whatever. I get that CMB makes it quicker by having an all-purpose roll, but what about running up a polearm, as someone suggested. Shouldn't that be a Dex based roll?
Also, my offering: I had an NPC goblin run down a table of food (while scooping up a chicken leg) and do a flying leap onto a PC...and promptly failing the check, did a faceplant into his shield.
we had goblins try to jump on a pc from a tent but ffailed and instead went very splat. I had a character throw a goblin at another character to knock him down. I like bullrush more than I used to especially with a spiked chain in hand. I still found that a 20 strength trip specialised fighter against goblins was failing far more than I would have expected him to.
|
|
I like the ease of use, but I still think the 15 is too high for at least some of the basic combat maneuvers. Also, I understand that they're aiming CMB to be a general tool for cool maneuvers, in the ways suggested in this thread, but I wonder whether strength is always the appropriate ability modifier. Technically, under 3.X rules, you could just have made the character make an arguably relevant skill or attribute check to swing on a chandelier or whatever. I get that CMB makes it quicker by having an all-purpose roll, but what about running up a polearm, as someone suggested. Shouldn't that be a Dex based roll?
As I stated in the original post - I think 15 is a bit high too. My suggestion was 12. Many others suggest 10 and I saw Kirth suggest 11 on a similar thread - for the purpose of consistency with level checks / dispel / etc.
That being said - there is a feat that allows DEX to be the modifier for CMB, which I feel is fair and appropriate.
Perhaps some creature types could have that ability as part of their racial design - goblins or kobolds for instance.
Robert
|
|
Well in a lot of those instances I don't feel a CMB is appropriate at all. DM's judgement should overwrite things like always using strength for CMB if they feel another stat is appropriate. But then some things that CMB was used for in this thread probably should have been a couple of skill checks instead.
|
|
Fighting is about progressing the combat and D&D has only one real level of progression: Damage. You win a fight not by knocking an opponent down or pushing him through squares but by inflict damage.
You can win a fight by knocking an opponent off a cliff or pinning him to the ground so your allies can knock him unconscious or you can tie him up.
I can't agree that you don't gain anything else than AoO from the trip.
With improved trip you get the following attack for free, prone opponents get a -4 penalty to AC against melee attacks (whole group benefits from this). Standing up is usually a move action, so there is no full atack action unless you want to stay on the ground. I don't think that it's a small benefit...
Maybe try to have a look on the Iron Heroes for more CMB creativity inspiration...
|
|
I can't agree that you don't gain anything else than AoO from the trip.
With improved trip you get the following attack for free, prone opponents get a -4 penalty to AC against melee attacks (whole group benefits from this). Standing up is usually a move action, so there is no full atack action unless you want to stay on the ground. I don't think that it's a small benefit...
Maybe try to have a look on the Iron Heroes for more CMB creativity inspiration...
Actually in PF, the improved trip feat no longer provides the extra attack (it was too powerful before when it did - i think they made the right call in changing it).
However you are accurate in how it is advantageous to trip your opponenet - or perform any number of other special maneuvers that you can resolve with the CMB.
As Zmar pointed out - tripping your opponent to the ground - even if you can't attack him again, gives you plenty of advantages.
1) If/when he tries to stand you get the AoO at +4 to hit for him being prone. This is good especially if you've been having trouble hitting his AC.
2) Once he stands, he is only allowed single-attack since standing up is a move-action; so if you're fighting a foe with a really nasty attack routine or a wicked weapon, limiting him to only attacking you once with it may save your life.
3) If he chooses to remain on the ground to either avoid the AoO or so that he can take a full-attack action - he has a -4 to hit you - helping you live longer - and probably discouraging him from using power attack. Then on your next attacks since he is on the ground you're still getting that +4 to attack, and allow you the freedom of choosing to power attack better or combat xpert or fight defensive etc.
4) you can simply move away immediately after tripping him. Sure he may get an AoO (at -4); unless you have tumble or something. Regardless, if he wants to hit you, he has to get up - then move to you - which is now a double move and he can't even attack you; now you have the option of giving him a full round of your attacks.
5) the obvious one is that once you put your opponent on his back, the rest of your companions find it quite easier to gang up on him since he's not able to move about, and have a nice hefty bonus to their attack rolls.
Robert
|
|
Well in a lot of those instances I don't feel a CMB is appropriate at all. DM's judgement should overwrite things like always using strength for CMB if they feel another stat is appropriate. But then some things that CMB was used for in this thread probably should have been a couple of skill checks instead.
Actually there is allready the precedent of using alternate ability scores and base DCs for CMBs take a look at feint instead of 15+BAB+Str for the defense it is 10+BAB+Wis, or 10+Sense motive.
That being said - there is a feat that allows DEX to be the modifier for CMB, which I feel is fair and appropriate.
Why? If a particular combat maneuver (balancing on a cart or running up a polearm) seem to have nothing to do with strength and everything to do with dexterity, what is the basis of using the CMB as written? The feat doesn't change anything. This isn't about character options, it's about whether the basic mechanic makes sense. In fact, the feat is just as bad, since then you're using dex for at least some combat maneuvers that should probably be more appropriately done with dexterity.
|
|
That being said - there is a feat that allows DEX to be the modifier for CMB, which I feel is fair and appropriate.Why? If a particular combat maneuver (balancing on a cart or running up a polearm) seem to have nothing to do with strength and everything to do with dexterity, what is the basis of using the CMB as written? The feat doesn't change anything. This isn't about character options, it's about whether the basic mechanic makes sense. In fact, the feat is just as bad, since then you're using dex for at least some combat maneuvers that should probably be more appropriately done with dexterity.
True enough - good point. I was pointing out that the feat exists for those who didn't know that in case it helped justify such a ruling, or for those who are not interested in changing the CMB mechanic at all by making ad hoc rulings such as spontaneously swapping dex.
Part of the beauty of CMB IMO is the simplicity and universal use of it. I like it because I don't have to make a bunch of spot-rulings. One number - one total on the character - not one for this stat and one for that stat. If you decided to take that feat, then you use that stat; if you dont you use this stat.
Realism often times complicates things. I like the CMB mechanic because its so easy and althogh perhaps not perfect for every single situation - its at least good enough to use to resovle it and move on.
Robert
|
|
I still think that a lot of the uses are situational at best. Yeah, if there happens to be a cliff, a player will dust off Bull's Rush. But if not...it serves virtually no purpose. Trip is somewhat worthwhile, but if it fails...you've just lost your opportunity to inflict damage (via hopefully an AoO which comes later - see stalling below).
Maybe they could make Advanced CMB which have a dual purpose. Or maybe they could actually give Fighters exclusive CMB's which would open up some neat options.
Well if you trip someone with your first attack, you can still attack them while they're on the ground with your iterative attacks.
If you're looking for some fighter-exclusive uses with CMB - have you checked out the fighter talents I posted a while ago as optional bonus feats for fighters only?
Robert
...
At it stands, CMB are very static. You give up a chance to progress combat (since the only true gauge of combat progression is defeating your opponent which requires you to chip away at their HP's) and instead choose to stall or slow down combat.
...
Well, for some of us it's equally important not to allow the enemy to progess combat, so we don't consider it to be a wastred time...
|
|
In my opinion you could keep CMB base DC as 15.
In the other hand, you could rise the Maneuver Feat bonus from +2 to +4 (as they already are in D&D 3.5).
As a Result you would have a Base DC 15 for untrained characters attempting combat maneuvers, ...
AND... a Base DC 11 for trained characters attempting combat maneuvers with the specific feats (DC 15 -4 from the feat = DC 11).
The problems with that is it a) really benefits the fighter who can afford to spend alot of those feats - far more than other classes - combined with his already 1 for 1 BAB per level. b) it doesn't help all of the the non-core maneuvers that have been discussed here that do not have such a feat.
The feats - having removed the chance of an AoO which if it hits does a good job of ruining the CMB attempt, are legtimately balanced at +2 IMO.
Robert
I love tripping monsters or NPC's. If they have a two handed weapon or bowhow the hell are they going to use it lying on their back? I also can't believe that it doesn't affect spellusers careful somatic components on their spells being knocked on their bottoms. It also neutralises one opponent for the short term. Most importantly it can make an opponent who is impossible to hit just hit-able.
|
|
The problems with that is it a) really benefits the fighter who can afford to spend alot of those feats - far more than other classes - combined with his already 1 for 1 BAB per level.What is the problem in having Feats that can benefit the Fighter? Isn´t the fighter supposed to be the class who can extract more benefits from a wide selection of feats?
Isn´t the fighter the archtype of the skilled warrior, the one with superior techniques and combat skills, opposed to the Barbarian who rellies on his instincts and brute force?
Do you really think that other classes need to be as good as fighters when performing combat maneuvers?
b) it doesn't help all of the the non-core maneuvers that have been discussed here that do not have such a feat.What are the core maneuvers that doesn´t have specific any Feats for?
Bullrush, Disarm, Grapple, Overrun, Sunder, Trip, all have feats.
And why Paizo cannot create new feats for the other maneuvers that doesn´t have specific feats for?
Yes the fighter is all those things. A +2 bonus for each feat is still better than everyone else who doesn't have the feats. Making them +4 doesn't make the fighter just slightly better though - it makes him outrageously better - since he can afford to take several of those feats that grant a significant bonus.
I agree that the fighter should be better - i'm arguing to what degree.
And at last, if all these argumments aren´t enough for you, tell me: Do you have any other better idea to help paizo to SOLVE this problem?
Yes.
you've been a part of that discussion as well
Robert