|
Came across this idea in our playtest. The Fighter in the group I run has tried out a few combat maneuvers, but has had a bit of difficulty executing them. Would it be appropriate to add his Weapon Training attack bonus to his CMB to perform or resist maneuvers which involve his trained weapon (disarm, trip, sunder)?
If that concept doesn't work, a general CMB bonus tied to level (+1 every 4 or 5 levels) might work instead. It would help differentiate the Fighter from other martial classes, and give them a small boost as well.
Thanks for reading.
May be a double post. First was eaten.
Director of Game Design
|
Came across this idea in our playtest. The Fighter in the group I run has tried out a few combat maneuvers, but has had a bit of difficulty executing them. Would it be appropriate to add his Weapon Training attack bonus to his CMB to perform or resist maneuvers which involve his trained weapon (disarm, trip, sunder)?
If that concept doesn't work, a general CMB bonus tied to level (+1 every 4 or 5 levels) might work instead. It would help differentiate the Fighter from other martial classes, and give them a small boost as well.
Thanks for reading.
May be a double post. First was eaten.
This is an interesting idea. What does everyone else think?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
Came across this idea in our playtest. The Fighter in the group I run has tried out a few combat maneuvers, but has had a bit of difficulty executing them. Would it be appropriate to add his Weapon Training attack bonus to his CMB to perform or resist maneuvers which involve his trained weapon (disarm, trip, sunder)?
If that concept doesn't work, a general CMB bonus tied to level (+1 every 4 or 5 levels) might work instead. It would help differentiate the Fighter from other martial classes, and give them a small boost as well.
Thanks for reading.
May be a double post. First was eaten.
This is an interesting idea. What does everyone else think?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I think this is on to something. To be elegant, and to put an end to the DC X debate, I'd suggest creating a Combat Feat called Canny Fighter, and have it grant a bonus to Combat Maneuvers equal to half the character's base attack bonus (minimum +1), and have it stackable with the Improved (Trip/Grapple/etc) feats.
So, aside from my kibitzing, yes, I think a bonus function to CMB for fighters is a good idea, but I'd use their existing bonus feat mechanic -- not every fighter has to be a grappler extraordinaire...
|
I'd go with adding weapon training to CMB as much for the defense aspect as anything, a skilled fighter can turn quite a bit to their advantage when they use the tools they know best so even on the offense I don't see that much of an issue, (Might need to be balanced a bit so as to not take up the monks current niche to much but they could do with a look at anyhow.)
|
Came across this idea in our playtest. The Fighter in the group I run has tried out a few combat maneuvers, but has had a bit of difficulty executing them. Would it be appropriate to add his Weapon Training attack bonus to his CMB to perform or resist maneuvers which involve his trained weapon (disarm, trip, sunder)?
If that concept doesn't work, a general CMB bonus tied to level (+1 every 4 or 5 levels) might work instead. It would help differentiate the Fighter from other martial classes, and give them a small boost as well.
Thanks for reading.
May be a double post. First was eaten.
I like this idea and something like this was going to be a suggestion of mine since I think a Fighter should be able to control the battle field and this would help..
Though I also think they still need help with Dmg, especially at high level, there Dmg scales poorly compared to other classes
It seems to make sense to me. The problem I see with this is that it encourages players to go the spiked chain or sundering route.
I'm actually a little confused about combat maneuvers, looking at the language in the text you make an "attack roll" which is generally BAB+STR+Weapon Attack Bonus+Weapon Training Bonus+any other attack bonuses and add your CMB to that roll. So unless "Attack Roll" in this context means something slightly different than it normally does isn't the CMB already included?
"When you perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB to the result plus any bonuses you might have due to specific feats or abilities. The DC to successfully perform the maneuver is determined using the following formula:"
Looking at it this is probably the wrong way to read it since that would mean using your strength bonus twice but the phrase "attack roll" is a little confusing. The other thing that is confusing to me is whether you need to first make a successful 'hit' versus the creatures armor class as was the case under 3.5SRD.
We've been playing it as follows:
[list]
But I've heard other people play this rule differently and I'm not entirely certain my reading is correct after rereading the rules.
In either case, I think adding the Weapon Training Bonus to the roll is probably good.
The Fighter in the group I run has tried out a few combat maneuvers, but has had a bit of difficulty executing them. Would it be appropriate to add his Weapon Training attack bonus to his CMB to perform or resist maneuvers which involve his trained weapon (disarm, trip, sunder)?
If something like that would be introduced I don't see the need for monk's Maneuver training. Looks like maneuver training was added to give monks a chance to shine in combat - through grappling and tripping. Making the fighters even more obvious a choice for combat maneuvers is working against that.
Maybe it would be better to remove monks altogether.
|
|
We've been playing it as follows:
[list]Make a normal attack roll versus the creatures AC
Resolve the AoO if appropriate
Make a 'CMB roll' (D20+CMB - damage from AoO versus the creatures CMB+15)
But I've heard other people play this rule differently and I'm not entirely certain my reading is correct after rereading the rules.
Dennis, what I believe is that you simply make one roll. "Make an attack roll" i think is meaning that you roll a d20 as if you were attacking.
Regardless, clarification has been asked before, but I've never seen more detail than that.
I think its just 1d20 add CMB. one roll. simple. It either succeeds or fails - no opposed roll, no secondary roll.
Robert
|
|
Came across this idea in our playtest. The Fighter in the group I run has tried out a few combat maneuvers, but has had a bit of difficulty executing them. Would it be appropriate to add his Weapon Training attack bonus to his CMB to perform or resist maneuvers which involve his trained weapon (disarm, trip, sunder)?
This is an interesting idea. What does everyone else think?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I think this is a great idea.
In fact, I'm already doing this in my games, as well as allowing the weapon training to add to the DC for enemy spellcasters to cast defensively.
Robert
|
|
The Fighter in the group I run has tried out a few combat maneuvers, but has had a bit of difficulty executing them. Would it be appropriate to add his Weapon Training attack bonus to his CMB to perform or resist maneuvers which involve his trained weapon (disarm, trip, sunder)?Maybe it would be better to remove monks altogether.
That sounds awfully passive-agressive of a comment.
Remember, that fighters do more than grapple and trip; they have frequent access to power-attack related feats such as: overrun, bull-rush, and sunder; as well as disarm and trip.
Robert
|
|
Ive been reading the Attack roll as merely rolling a d20 and adding the CMB to it vs DC 15, and not making two rolls, so allowing the Weapon Training to stack with this would be an additional plus.
*Ninja'd* ;)
But if you wanted to use that Feat that was mentioned instead 'Canny Fighter': instead of making the bonus +1 per 5 levels, Id have +1 per each +5 BAB, making those with the 'good' attack progession benefit more from it than those not as skilled at fighting. ;)
Another Thing I might add is 'Weapon Groups that have been chosen for 'Weapon training' can be used to peform any Combat Manuevers a Fighter has 'improved whatever in'
ie for a normal character, a Longsword cannot be used for tripping...but in the hands of a fighter who's trained in tripping and with long blades that changes as he hooks your boot with the blade and jerks ;)
|
|
We've been playing it as follows:
[list]Make a normal attack roll versus the creatures AC
Resolve the AoO if appropriate
Make a 'CMB roll' (D20+CMB - damage from AoO versus the creatures CMB+15 But I've heard other people play this rule differently and I'm not entirely certain my reading is correct after rereading the rules.
Dennis, what I believe is that you simply make one roll. "Make an attack roll" i think is meaning that you roll a d20 as if you were attacking.
Regardless, clarification has been asked before, but I've never seen more detail than that.
I think its just 1d20 add CMB. one roll. simple. It either succeeds or fails - no opposed roll, no secondary roll.
Robert
This is my understanding also.
|
Director of Game Design
|
Ive been reading the Attack roll as merely rolling a d20 and adding the CMB to it vs DC 15, and not making two rolls, so allowing the Weapon Training to stack with this would be an additional plus.
Dread is correct here (Except it is DC 15 + opponent's CMB). This language will be clarified. Please make sure to bring this back up when we get to the combat chapter.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Maybe it would be better to remove monks altogether.
Remember, that fighters do more than grapple and trip; they have frequent access to power-attack related feats such as: overrun, bull-rush, and sunder; as well as disarm and trip.
Maybe my comment didn't come out exactly as meant. The point was that if fighters are equally capable in combat than monks why not combine them?
I know backwards compability is one of the stated goals of Pathfinder. If it keeps us from combining the two classes, maybe we should differentiate them more - instead of making them more similar. Unfortunately, I don't have any ideas how to do that, at the moment.
Ive been reading the Attack roll as merely rolling a d20 and adding the CMB to it vs DC 15, and not making two rolls, so allowing the Weapon Training to stack with this would be an additional plus.Dread is correct here (Except it is DC 15 + opponent's CMB). This language will be clarified. Please make sure to bring this back up when we get to the combat chapter.
Thanks for the clarification, when I went back and reread it for my post I kind of suspected this was the cast but the phrase "attack roll" threw me. I'll try and remember to bring this up when the subject comes up later.
In this case I definitely think Weapon Training should be included.
As a side note the value of 'Agile Maneuvers' just went up about 3 notches in my book.
|
|
Maybe it would be better to remove monks altogether.Remember, that fighters do more than grapple and trip; they have frequent access to power-attack related feats such as: overrun, bull-rush, and sunder; as well as disarm and trip.Maybe my comment didn't come out exactly as meant. The point was that if fighters are equally capable in combat than monks why not combine them?
I know backwards compability is one of the stated goals of Pathfinder. If it keeps us from combining the two classes, maybe we should differentiate them more - instead of making them more similar. Unfortunately, I don't have any ideas how to do that, at the moment.
I think this is more a subject that should come up when Monks are discussed as thats where the differances should lie,
Jason, there's still so much confusion about what bonuses apply to Combat Maneuvers, offensively and defensively - Perhaps it's reasonable to assume that all Attack bonuses apply when attacking, but then there are "Defensive" bonuses like Fighting Defensively/Full Defense/DEX... (which helped against Trips and stuff in 3.5)
In the interests of simplification, perhaps CMB could just become another attack roll, but along the lines of Touch AC, a "Maneuver AC" could be introduced that increases with BAB/STR like CMB, but also takes all Dodge bonuses into account. If this were the case, the base 15 DC/AC might be lowered to 12 or 13, given more bonuses exist to increase it...?
I too like the idea of adding the weapon training to the fighter's CMB
|
|
It seems to make sense to me. The problem I see with this is that it encourages players to go the spiked chain or sundering route.
Actually, it would be great to see spiked chain wielders do something besides whirlwind attack. That's all they seemed to do at my table. :)
Also, not sure if I was clear in the original post, but CMB bonus would apply defensively too. If the CMB bonus is tied to weapon training, it would make it harder to disarm or sunder the fighter's trained weapons.
The general +1/4 or +1/5 level bonus version would apply to all combat maneuvers (trip, disarm, sunder, overrun, bull rush, grapple). A good general all around bonus for fighters.
Thanks for reading.
|
Jason,
I'm definitely liking the idea of Fighters getting a bonus to combat maneuvers. I would suggest using the Monk AC mechanic as the basis.
I'm also going to suggest that Giant Fighters add that +4 to AC to CMB vs. Giants as well. Not much use having a decent AC vs giants, if the giant just grapples you.
|
|
Came across this idea in our playtest. The Fighter in the group I run has tried out a few combat maneuvers, but has had a bit of difficulty executing them. Would it be appropriate to add his Weapon Training attack bonus to his CMB to perform or resist maneuvers which involve his trained weapon (disarm, trip, sunder)?
If that concept doesn't work, a general CMB bonus tied to level (+1 every 4 or 5 levels) might work instead. It would help differentiate the Fighter from other martial classes, and give them a small boost as well.
Thanks for reading.
May be a double post. First was eaten.
This is an interesting idea. What does everyone else think?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I was already doing that, as the rules were unclear (see my Greyhawk thread for details).
It worked out rather well, making the fighter excel in their area. In fact, almost too well - the fighter rarely failed his sunder attempts, which became rather irritating for equipped NPCs.
We also added a magic weapon or armors enhancement bonus to any CMB check involving that item (so if you attempted to sunder magic armor, the magic bonus was added to the CMB Defense).
I like the ideal of weapon training to CMB it makes alot of since. as for the monk its CMB would be better to be at lest 2+HD anyhow but we'll save monk talk for that time.
well I agree the Weapon training should add to it,
but it just goes along with all attack modifiers
(flanking, attacking from invisible, etc, etc.)
I really think the simplest way to go is take CMB as attack roll and make it a standard attack roll,
and take CMB as Defensive DC, and make it "Maneuver AC", with a 15 (or higher than 10) base DC + CMB & Dodge bonuses.
Jason, there's still so much confusion about what bonuses apply to Combat Maneuvers, offensively and defensively - Perhaps it's reasonable to assume that all Attack bonuses apply when attacking, but then there are "Defensive" bonuses like Fighting Defensively/Full Defense/DEX... (which helped against Trips and stuff in 3.5)
Dread Explains it pretty clearly here and Jason agrees with a moderate correction:
Ive been reading the Attack roll as merely rolling a d20 and adding the CMB to it vs DC 15, and not making two rolls, so allowing the Weapon Training to stack with this would be an additional plus.Dread is correct here (Except it is DC 15 + opponent's CMB). This language will be clarified. Please make sure to bring this back up when we get to the combat chapter.
So it's not an 'attack roll' the way we think of it, it is simply:
D20 + CMB versus 15 + Opponents CMB (+ any damage you took on an AoO)
In the interests of simplification, perhaps CMB could just become another attack roll, but along the lines of Touch AC, a "Maneuver AC" could be introduced that increases with BAB/STR like CMB, but also takes all Dodge bonuses into account. If this were the case, the base 15 DC/AC might be lowered to 12 or 13, given more bonuses exist to increase it...?
I think it's pretty simplified as it is now that I understand it. Hopefully the final wording will be a little more clear.
Hmm..
I just find it baffling that it WOULDN'T be easier to Trip someone with your buddy Flanking them & throwing off their defences, or if you're attacking from Invisibility and they can't even see where you're swinging from. Likewise, why Full Defense/Fighting Defensively would provide NO help agaisnt Combat Maneuvers, but WOULD if they're just trying to cut you/ punch you.
All these things applied to Trip/Grapple/etc in 3.5, and I don't understand why they shouldn't to Combat Maneuvers.
But, hey, this can wait until the Combat Chapter, right?
EDIT: It just seems the simpler route ultimately, rather than: Well, THESE bonuses improve your CMB, and Charging improves a Bullrush but NOT an Over-Run, or Trip to knock them down. Rather than specifying the details of a new subsystem, you just need to describe one thing: the Maneuver AC/Defensive CMB DC which includes BAB. Normal attacks already include BAB & STR (or DEX w/ Weapon Finesse).
Jason, I vote Yes.
My players even asked me why this wasn't an option, even if I hadn't asked myself until then.
|
|
Yeah lets keep CMB from getting too bogged down with the hows and why's and whats applied. The Kiss principle is best here.
As Ogre pointed out, its pretty simple the way it stands...
CMB+d20+ any feat bonus vs DC15 + CMB + damage from AoO.
the way its worked out, is if you are going up against someone whos your equal, you succeed 25% of the time...which is about right when trying to perform a special manuever against someone as good as you.
But back to task- The Fighter should be better at this than anyone, and needs something to set them apart from others who try to specialize in manuevers.
To make the Fighter the best at this (Combat Manuevers) Tieing there Weapon Training to CMB makes sense, and the weapon attack bonus' will make them better at it naturally. Its easy, simple...and works.
As I mentioned the only other thing Id like to see is having those weapons a fighter takes as his weapon training groups be allowed to perform combat manuevers, even if they arent specifically designed for it, though if this wasnt included it wouldnt be a big deal ;)
I think adding weapon training to CMB as well as other situational bonuses (flat footed/flanked/defensive maneuvering) makes a great deal of sense.
|
Ive been reading the Attack roll as merely rolling a d20 and adding the CMB to it vs DC 15, and not making two rolls, so allowing the Weapon Training to stack with this would be an additional plus.Dread is correct here (Except it is DC 15 + opponent's CMB). This language will be clarified. Please make sure to bring this back up when we get to the combat chapter.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!
That has driven me nuts!
Came across this idea in our playtest. The Fighter in the group I run has tried out a few combat maneuvers, but has had a bit of difficulty executing them. Would it be appropriate to add his Weapon Training attack bonus to his CMB to perform or resist maneuvers which involve his trained weapon (disarm, trip, sunder)?
If that concept doesn't work, a general CMB bonus tied to level (+1 every 4 or 5 levels) might work instead. It would help differentiate the Fighter from other martial classes, and give them a small boost as well.
Thanks for reading.
May be a double post. First was eaten.
I think this is a really cool idea. It's so...well, smooth, mathematically. Plus it gives the fighters a chance to be a sort of 'master of combat' using mechanics that already exist. I like the idea that it's harder to separate a fighter from his weaponry than it is other classes (as well as harder to knock him down or pin him).
|
|
I think this is a really cool idea. It's so...well, smooth, mathematically. Plus it gives the fighters a chance to be a sort of 'master of combat' using mechanics that already exist. I like the idea that it's harder to separate a fighter from his weaponry than it is other classes (as well as harder to knock him down or pin him).
I also think that this is a good idea, but I think that it could be taken a bit further. Perhaps fighters should also be allowed to use their Weapon Training bonus for the skill checks associated with certain feats. For example, perhaps a fighter should be permitted to add her weapon training bonus to the Intimidate check associated with the Dazzling Display feat.
I join the ranks of those who definitely like the idea of adding the fighter's weapon training to armed combat maneuvers!
It's... just perfect, rules-wise and flavor-wise.
Hell yes! Let's give the fighter something uniquely fighterish! :)
|
|
I'm not against giving the fighter something extra, CMB-wise, but I think it's important that combat maneuvers not be made too easy. I think the 30 percent chance of success against an equal opponent is pretty much right on the money, given how powerful most of the combat maneuvers are, and tilting things one way or the other should be done cautiously.
Any bonus should be fairly small ... say +1 at 1st level and +1/5 levels, for a max of +5 at 20th. If this seems too little, remember that an ogre -- ten feet and 650 pounds -- has exactly a +1 advantage over a 3rd-level, STR 20 half-orc. The size mods were diminished for a reason. If that half-orc were a fighter under the mods above, he'd be even with the ogre, and at 5th level he'd have a +4 advantage.
--Jeff
Any bonus should be fairly small ... say +1 at 1st level and +1/5 levels, for a max of +5 at 20th.
The idea is to use the fighter's weapon training bonus as an addition to CMB, not BAB.
That bonus would have a maximum of +4 at 17th level.
I don't see much of a compelling reason NOT to add the weapon training bonus. After all, if you're especially good with say, an axe, it should be harder to disarm you while wielding one (I'm assuming such a bonus would work both ways, increasing your CMDC as well as your CMB).
|
|
I don't see much of a compelling reason NOT to add the weapon training bonus. After all, if you're especially good with say, an axe, it should be harder to disarm you while wielding one (I'm assuming such a bonus would work both ways, increasing your CMDC as well as your CMB).
Increasing both the CMB and Combat Maneuver DC when wielding a Weapon Trained weapon was exactly what I was thinking. Someone who has focused on the axe should be better at disarming opponents, and be harder to disarm.