Announcement: New Feats for Playtesting


Announcements

151 to 200 of 229 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Anyone got the feats into a nice pdf yet?

Scarab Sages RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

-Archangel- wrote:
Anyone got the feats into a nice pdf yet?

Do you just mean the new ones or all Beta Feats? I have the new ones done. Not hard, just copy and paste them into a Word Document then convert to .pdf. If you want I'll mail it to you, it's only 62KB.


I love the whole Shield set of feats...greatly needed! However, the feats also need to be opened up to paladins. Many paladins exemplify the entire sword and shield approach and as such a player see the benfit of this. As it stands now only fighters can take anything beyond the shield focus.

Or think about adding something like Divine Shield from the complete warrior or divine book – Std action – uses 1 Turn attp: adds Charisma Bonus to shield bonus for half paladin LVL in rounds.

Sovereign Court

Sneaksy Dragon wrote:

the reason you need to have Fighter only feats is because you can just take the creme of the crop as a barbarian (or other "low" feat character), and do whatever you want better than a similarly built Fighter. it makes the Fighter the bard of the melee classes. there are only so many feats in one progression that you can get, and now with every class getting more feats over a 20 level span, its more of a problem.

sure a Fighter can be good at sword and board, twohanded power attacking and two weapon fighting with the same character, only one of those is needed to get the job done.

This to me explains part of why we shouldn't have fighter-only feats. You also can't take the 'creme of the crop' as a barbarian, because you don't get enough feats; as you say, you might pursue one feat chain to the end, but then you are very specialised and unless you have a tacit acceptance that one feat chain is better than all the others (which would need to be fixed, right, because then combat feats as a whole would be broken) then there have to be advantages to being a pony with more than one trick.

Liberty's Edge

-Archangel- wrote:
Anyone got the feats into a nice pdf yet?

Ya I was hoping the PDF Master (the dude who did the other addon's Paladin, Rage, Animal Companions) was going to tackle this one too!


flash_cxxi wrote:
-Archangel- wrote:
Anyone got the feats into a nice pdf yet?
Do you just mean the new ones or all Beta Feats? I have the new ones done. Not hard, just copy and paste them into a Word Document then convert to .pdf. If you want I'll mail it to you, it's only 62KB.

Could you upload it to a file sharing service and post a link in this topic please?

I believe a lot of folks will find that useful.


-Archangel- wrote:
flash_cxxi wrote:
-Archangel- wrote:
Anyone got the feats into a nice pdf yet?
Do you just mean the new ones or all Beta Feats? I have the new ones done. Not hard, just copy and paste them into a Word Document then convert to .pdf. If you want I'll mail it to you, it's only 62KB.

Could you upload it to a file sharing service and post a link in this topic please?

I believe a lot of folks will find that useful.

Not as pretty as previous efforts.

Feats PDF

Dark Archive

BryonD wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
raidou wrote:

Jason, I'm very hesitant to use critical effects that are automatic, even for a single round. I think any "rider" effects should allow a save for no effect. A keen-scimitar/kukri/falchion wielder can keep a foe stunned/blinded/etc for multiple rounds without that foe being able to do anything about it.

That's not fun if used against the players, and it's certainly not fun from the DM's side of the screen.

That's a good point; I'd still love to hear some feedback from playtesting of no-save versions of these abilities as well, of course...

Just an quick thought would be to have these effects all key off a natural 20 and confirmed crit.

If you assume that an axe and a scimitar are balanced as is, then adding a special effect that works more often for a scimitar is not going to maintain that balance.

But if you add the exact same special effect to all weapons, then the balance is retained.

This is pretty much how it has worked in my playtest campaign -- all weapon categories have "special" effects (i.e. bleeding crits for piercing weapons and stunning crits for bludgeoning weapons, *but* it's a weapon-type quality, so you need not burn a feat on it) that happen on a natural 20 (which is a "special hit" and need not be a confirmed crit).


I share a similar concern about Critical feats.
1) They work too well with other insured critical feats we already have.
It should be made that these feats do not stack.

2) Certain weapons will benefit much more from this then other weapons.
Changing this to only on natural 20 also does not work because this then favors all the 20/x3 and 20/x4 weapons.
Also not allowing Improved Critical and Keen to work with Critical feats would help in balancing this. (Difference between 15-20 vs 19-20 and 18-20 vs 20 is much more)

I propose that a condition for activation is as now but the effect of the critical feats changes based on the critical multiplier of the weapon (duration, effect, penalty or DC for the save).

3) DC is too high, and it stands out from rest of the rules. It should be calculated like spell like abilities: 10+half level (or BAB) + relevant ability.
I propose to make the relevant ability Strength for some feats and Dexterity for others (some of the critical effects are more likely to be done by brute force and some by finesse).
Also here if you want you can give 20/x3 and 20/x4 weapons a bonus to this DC (+1 for x3 and +2 for x4?!)

Liberty's Edge

Dennis da Ogre wrote:
-Archangel- wrote:
flash_cxxi wrote:
-Archangel- wrote:
Anyone got the feats into a nice pdf yet?
Do you just mean the new ones or all Beta Feats? I have the new ones done. Not hard, just copy and paste them into a Word Document then convert to .pdf. If you want I'll mail it to you, it's only 62KB.

Could you upload it to a file sharing service and post a link in this topic please?

I believe a lot of folks will find that useful.

Not as pretty as previous efforts.

Feats PDF

Thanks dude! Nice job!

Scarab Sages RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Azoun The Sage wrote:
Dennis da Ogre wrote:
-Archangel- wrote:
flash_cxxi wrote:
-Archangel- wrote:
Anyone got the feats into a nice pdf yet?
Do you just mean the new ones or all Beta Feats? I have the new ones done. Not hard, just copy and paste them into a Word Document then convert to .pdf. If you want I'll mail it to you, it's only 62KB.

Could you upload it to a file sharing service and post a link in this topic please?

I believe a lot of folks will find that useful.

Not as pretty as previous efforts.

Feats PDF

Thanks dude! Nice job!

Yeah that makes my mine look like a PoS!


The critical feats bother me.
I'm not so bothered by the effects but the comparison to certain spells not quite right. Polar Ray may have no save, but it is subject to SR.

I think perhaps a better approach could be taken by making them fighter talents, say gotten at 1st level and every 5 or 6 levels after that. I would further suggest fighters get Maneuver points.
The way I think it could work would be: the ability triggers automatically on a crit. Alternately, before an attack roll is rolled, the fighter can spend a Maneuver point to say "I'm going for a Blinding Critical". If the attack misses, the point is wasted. If the attack is a crit... well, I'm torn on giving the fighter the point back or saying it's still spent.
You could also include one additional trick:
Spend 1 point to automatically confirm a crit (spent after rolling the attack). This would give the axe and pick wielders more versatility.

This way the abilities are built into the class, are still nifty, and can still be restricted by level.

I do have one other point: somebody with the Mettle ability would still reduce the tough critical abilities from Still A Penalty to No Penalty with a successful save.

Dark Archive

-Archangel- wrote:
Anyone got the feats into a nice pdf yet?

Yep,I do. If you still need them, send me an e-mail at

CorellonLarethianqweb.de


teddywolf wrote:

The critical feats bother me.

I'm not so bothered by the effects but the comparison to certain spells not quite right. Polar Ray may have no save, but it is subject to SR.

True, but on the other hand, these feats require you to hit AND confirm a critical. So, wouldn't that be the equivalent of a ranged touch attack, with a SR roll afterwards to 'confirm'? I mean, it's not like either of them is automatic.

Maneuver points is an unnecessary complication, IMO, and judging by the loathing of Rage Points among a lot of people, it wouldn't be too popular, either. I, at least, think that the critical feats are fine as is, at least until I get enough playtesting in to believe otherwise.


Psychic_Robot wrote:


Anyway, I think that these expanded feats are a good idea, but there are too many of them. To be of any use--even to a fighter, who gets a billion feats--they need to be combined. For instance, why not give the benefits of all the "Greater [Combat Maneuver]" feats as an automatic bonus to characters with a high BAB (or for being fighters)?

Please, please, Do NOT do this. The idea is for fighters to each look different at level 20. That means there need to be far more feats that are cool and worth taking then you are able to take.

I'm currently playing a level 6 fighter and I'm bleah on all the feats that are available. If *these* were options, I'd be thrilled. Fighters should *not* be able to take all the feats. There should be cool useful feats that every build can take.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
-Archangel- wrote:

3) DC is too high, and it stands out from rest of the rules. It should be calculated like spell like abilities: 10+half level (or BAB) + relevant ability.

I propose to make the relevant ability Strength for some feats and Dexterity for others (some of the critical effects are more likely to be done by brute force and some by finesse).

I share your concern - though I'm not sure the change you propose will *lower* the saves. It could easily raise them. I also find a bit of poetic beauty in fighter feat saves being based on pure skill.

-Archangel- wrote:
Also here if you want you can give 20/x3 and 20/x4 weapons a bonus to this DC (+1 for x3 and +2 for x4?!)

Fully agree with this (I was going to say +2 and +4 for x3 and x4 respectively).

Dark Archive

Majuba wrote:
-Archangel- wrote:

3) DC is too high, and it stands out from rest of the rules. It should be calculated like spell like abilities: 10+half level (or BAB) + relevant ability.

I propose to make the relevant ability Strength for some feats and Dexterity for others (some of the critical effects are more likely to be done by brute force and some by finesse).

I share your concern - though I'm not sure the change you propose will *lower* the saves. It could easily raise them. I also find a bit of poetic beauty in fighter feat saves being based on pure skill.

-Archangel- wrote:
Also here if you want you can give 20/x3 and 20/x4 weapons a bonus to this DC (+1 for x3 and +2 for x4?!)
Fully agree with this (I was going to say +2 and +4 for x3 and x4 respectively).

I'm fine with this, but should it happen, I sure would like to see Scythe "toned down" a bit, i.e. inflicting 1D8 points of damage. As it stands, it's the powergamer's favourite -- and I've seen a disturbing trend (in my group) for melee types picking up mostly X4 weapons (Scythe or Pick -- the latter for dwarves, especially). This has resulted (again, in my group) in that the party inflicts seriously less damage in general (about 4-6 points less per hit per "meleeist"), but the lure of "supernova" crits (100+ damage) seems to be so lucrative that they're willing to give up 15-20 points of damage per PC per round to get to describe "And as I swing my pick at his head, it *EXPLODES* in a burst of gore and brain matter!!!" (I asked a player about this, and he actually said that the main reason for using a pick was "those sweet X4 crits").

For this reason, I decided to give the group magical weapons at relatively low level, because I couldn't use any monsters with DR -- with point-buy (even using the Epic point-buy) the best STR bonus to damage was +4 (two-handed), and only one of the PCs could actually "punch through" DR 5/Silver with moderate success (note that this group included *four* melee PCs: a fighter, barbarian, barbarian/cleric and paladin).

Have any others seen this "trend" with X4 weapons becoming more popular than greatswords or greataxes?


Dennis da Ogre wrote:

Not as pretty as previous efforts.

Feats PDF

Muchas gracias!

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Asgetrion wrote:
For this reason, I decided to give the group magical weapons at relatively low level, because I couldn't use any monsters with DR -- with point-buy (even using the Epic point-buy) the best STR bonus to damage was +4 (two-handed), and only one of the PCs could actually "punch through" DR 5/Silver with moderate success (note that this group included...

Heh... the mechanical argument for taking multipliers over threat range is that they punch through DR better. Three x2 crits with a falchion aren't as good as one x4 crit with a scythe because the DR applies three times. (That's why I'm happy to see the critical feats, they give threat range weapons some good utility.) But anyway... I think you're being extremely generous to your players! They made a decision with obvious consequences. I certainly wouldn't be deliberately avoiding a weakness they chose to have. Guess I'm just not as nice. ;)

Along those same lines, as a player, my melee specialists generally start off with a silver dagger and a cold iron morningstar in addition to whatever weapon they prefer...


RE: Improved Great Fortitude / Improved Lightning Reflexes / Improved Iron Will.

With these new feats, it seems even more of a waste of a feat just to get 1 free attempt at a failed save that is not guaranteed to be better. The pre-requisite feats are close to "builder feats" which Pathfinder has done a pretty good job of eliminating such reference by powering up the traditional "builder feats". I have always felt that a +2 to one save is weak for a feat. I have always house ruled this as a +3. Adding these weak Improved feats, to already weak "builder" feats really seems like a raw deal.

Here are my suggested fixes:
- Option 1: Allow the Improved feat to also grant an additional +2 to the save, plus the re-roll option.
- Option 2: Allow the Improved feat to also add +4 on the reroll attempt.
- Option 3: Allow the Improved feat to function 3 times per day.
- Option 4: Allow the Improved feat to add +1d8 to the failed roll.


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Shield Mastery (Combat)

You can use a shield to deflect harm.
Prerequisites: Shield Focus, Shield Proficiency, 4th-level fighter.
Benefit: Whenever you are using a shield, you gain DR 2/—. You must be aware of the attack to gain this bonus. Any effect that causes you to lose your Dexterity or shield bonus causes you to lose this bonus. This bonus stacks with all other forms of damage reduction without a type (such as the damage reduction gained by barbarians).

Please tell me this doesn't replace the Shield Mastery feat in the PH. I love the original, and wish this would work with it.


Captain Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

Shield Mastery (Combat)

You can use a shield to deflect harm.
Prerequisites: Shield Focus, Shield Proficiency, 4th-level fighter.
Benefit: Whenever you are using a shield, you gain DR 2/—. You must be aware of the attack to gain this bonus. Any effect that causes you to lose your Dexterity or shield bonus causes you to lose this bonus. This bonus stacks with all other forms of damage reduction without a type (such as the damage reduction gained by barbarians).
Please tell me this doesn't replace the Shield Mastery feat in the PH. I love the original, and wish this would work with it.

Nvm


Jason Bulmahn wrote:
raidou wrote:

Jason, I'm very hesitant to use critical effects that are automatic, even for a single round. I think any "rider" effects should allow a save for no effect. A keen-scimitar/kukri/falchion wielder can keep a foe stunned/blinded/etc for multiple rounds without that foe being able to do anything about it.

That's not fun if used against the players, and it's certainly not fun from the DM's side of the screen.

just my thoughts.

thanks,

-eric

Eric, I understand your concern, but please remember two things. First, crits are far from automatic. Second, the blinding feat is for 15th level fighters and stunning is for 17th level. At those levels, such feats should have truly awesome effects.

In the end, I think we are going to need playtesting on these feats.

Hey, wait a minute. You tricked me into answering a comment post. Let's save the rest of these for the design forum.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

I may missunderstand something here but the Devastating Blow feat give you an automatic crit as long as you hit your target. And if you don't PA you more or less do.


Zark wrote:


I may missunderstand something here but the Devastating Blow feat give you an automatic crit as long as you hit your target. And if you don't PA you more or less do.

Devastating Blow is not the only option. ...Bless Weapon here we go.

Automatic crit!

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

Are any of these feats going to be included on bonus feat lists for some of the classes? In particular, some of the movement related ones sound like good options for the monk bonus feat list.

Liberty's Edge

Zark wrote:
Zark wrote:


I may missunderstand something here but the Devastating Blow feat give you an automatic crit as long as you hit your target. And if you don't PA you more or less do.

Devastating Blow is not the only option. ...Bless Weapon here we go.

Automatic crit!

DB doesn't trigger crit abilities on your weapon; I strongly, strongly suspect that, if the crit feats make it into the final, DB will not trigger them either.

And bless weapon doesn't autocrit, it just automatically confirms the crit, which is a much less impressive thing. Confirming a crit at level 17+ is not really an issue, particularly when you have a +4 bonus to crit confirmations anyway. The tricky is that you still have to roll a 15+ on the die to get it to go off.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

Has anyone put together a PDF/Doc that has both the new feats and the old feats together alphabetically in one place, or at least a table to the feat trees?


RE: Shall Not Pass (Combat)

This feat just seems way too powerful. Stopping movement should not be done that easily. In the very least the opponent should get a Fortitude save?


I'd like to state my approval of Fleet.

It's been well-received here.


Dennis da Ogre wrote:

Not as pretty as previous efforts.

Feats PDF

Meh...Pretty is for half-elves and wizards! (lol)

Let me ask you a question though: I''m pretty new to the boards, and these have obviously been posted a long while. Is your PDF up to date with any discussions and the latest revisions to these new feats?

I ask, because my first impression is tha the movement related feats seem to need an "unencumbered or lightly encumbered" restriction as well, but I'm just looking at them on line for the first time (havent'gone through the PDF yet).

Thanks.


Shisumo wrote:
Zark wrote:
Zark wrote:


I may missunderstand something here but the Devastating Blow feat give you an automatic crit as long as you hit your target. And if you don't PA you more or less do.

Devastating Blow is not the only option. ...Bless Weapon here we go.

Automatic crit!

DB doesn't trigger crit abilities on your weapon; I strongly, strongly suspect that, if the crit feats make it into the final, DB will not trigger them either.

And bless weapon doesn't autocrit, it just automatically confirms the crit, which is a much less impressive thing. Confirming a crit at level 17+ is not really an issue, particularly when you have a +4 bonus to crit confirmations anyway. The tricky is that you still have to roll a 15+ on the die to get it to go off.

Yes I was wrong on Bless Weapon, my bad.

I just wanted to point out that DB trigger crit feats.

Sovereign Court

Can someone help me understand Greater Grapple? I *think* I understand it, but I have a few doubts after careful reading of the feat.

Does the feat imply that a creature, normally, can only *maintain* a grapple each round, and cannot harm, pin or move an already grappled creature on their turn?

Or does the feat mean that a creature now gets two grapple attempts each round, and that as long as one of the two check succeeds (i.e. if the maintainer successfully harms, pin or move the victim), the grapple is maintained?

Thank you in advance for any light you can shed on this!


As per Beta,
"maintaining a grapple" MEANS you can "harm, pin or move an already grappled creature".
(or try to tie them up, though Pinning them first is usually a good idea)

Sovereign Court

Thanks Quandary!

This feat is very powerful then!


Jason Bulmahn wrote:


Greater Trip
You can make follow-up attacks on foes that you knock prone.
Prerequisites: Improved Trip, base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes an attack of opportunity.
Normal:Creatures that are knocked prone do not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Does the opponent provoke an AoO from only the person who performed the trip or from anyone who threatens?


Zac Bond wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:


Greater Trip
You can make follow-up attacks on foes that you knock prone.
Prerequisites: Improved Trip, base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes an attack of opportunity.
Normal:Creatures that are knocked prone do not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Does the opponent provoke an AoO from only the person who performed the trip or from anyone who threatens?

Only you. As the feat says, when you trip an opponent, it provokes an AoO. If your party members don't have Greater Trip, they can't make an AoO, as listed in "Normal". If they do have it, they didn't trip the opponent, so no AoO.


Almagest wrote:
Only you. As the feat says, when you trip an opponent, it provokes an AoO. If your party members don't have Greater Trip, they can't make an AoO, as listed in "Normal". If they do have it, they didn't trip the opponent, so no AoO.

That was my initial impression, but the descriptive text is at odds with the Benefit text. To clarify, it should read:

"Benefit: Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes an attack of opportunity from you."

To say that the opponent simply "provokes an attack of opportunity" implies that anyone who threatens may take an AoO, and contradicts the descriptive text.

Sovereign Court

Zac Bond wrote:
Almagest wrote:
Only you. As the feat says, when you trip an opponent, it provokes an AoO. If your party members don't have Greater Trip, they can't make an AoO, as listed in "Normal". If they do have it, they didn't trip the opponent, so no AoO.

That was my initial impression, but the descriptive text is at odds with the Benefit text. To clarify, it should read:

"Benefit: Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes an attack of opportunity from you."

To say that the opponent simply "provokes an attack of opportunity" implies that anyone who threatens may take an AoO, and contradicts the descriptive text.

I think the feat is written to imply that when the mothertucker goes down, he goes down hard, and therefore provokes AoOs from anybody threatening him at the time... my two coppers anyhow, as you need three feats to get there...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Zac Bond wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:


Greater Trip
You can make follow-up attacks on foes that you knock prone.
Prerequisites: Improved Trip, base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: Whenever you successfully trip an opponent, that opponent provokes an attack of opportunity.
Normal:Creatures that are knocked prone do not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Does the opponent provoke an AoO from only the person who performed the trip or from anyone who threatens?

It should probably read like Greater Bullsrush,

Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Whenever you bull rush an opponent, their movement provokes attacks of opportunity from all of your allies (but not you).

The idea your action is being spent to trip/push the opponent, but your allies get to take advantage of your foes off balance state.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Galnörag wrote:

It should probably read like Greater Bullsrush,

Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Whenever you bull rush an opponent, their movement provokes attacks of opportunity from all of your allies (but not you).
The idea your action is being spent to trip/push the opponent, but your allies get to take advantage of your foes off balance state.

I'm pretty sure Greater Trip *is* supposed to give you an attack as well. Just the "You can make follow-up attacks on foes that you knock prone." part says that. Looks like they simply work differently. Bull rush is pretty nasty sometimes - adding attacks of opportunity makes it worse.

From a just thinking about it point of view, you can't "follow-up" on a bull rush - you just pushed them away. They provoke as they move, as opposed to when they land.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
Majuba wrote:
Galnörag wrote:

It should probably read like Greater Bullsrush,

Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Whenever you bull rush an opponent, their movement provokes attacks of opportunity from all of your allies (but not you).
The idea your action is being spent to trip/push the opponent, but your allies get to take advantage of your foes off balance state.

I'm pretty sure Greater Trip *is* supposed to give you an attack as well. Just the "You can make follow-up attacks on foes that you knock prone." part says that. Looks like they simply work differently. Bull rush is pretty nasty sometimes - adding attacks of opportunity makes it worse.

From a just thinking about it point of view, you can't "follow-up" on a bull rush - you just pushed them away. They provoke as they move, as opposed to when they land.

My feeling with both Trip and Bullrush you are busy doing the tripping or bullrushing, and since your so awesome at it your foe is thrown completely off balance, as such allies who are near by can make a strike, but for you to get a follow up means you are kind of doing 2 things at once.

Was this clarified anywhere in the play test for feats and skills forum?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Galnörag wrote:
Was this clarified anywhere in the play test for feats and skills forum?

If it was, it was probably in this forum.

Sovereign Court

3.5 "Improved Trip" lets someone make an attack if the trip attempt is successful. I believe they removed that in PRPG's version of Improved Trip, so "Greater Trip" may be meant to reinstate that feature... now, if it not only does that, AND lets your friend take AoOs... this is a mighty feat indeed... :P


While it is a little late now for any changes I will entertain this discussion.

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
3.5 "Improved Trip" lets someone make an attack if the trip attempt is successful. I believe they removed that in PRPG's version of Improved Trip, so "Greater Trip" may be meant to reinstate that feature... now, if it not only does that, AND lets your friend take AoOs... this is a mighty feat indeed... :P
D20SRD.org wrote:

Improved Trip [General]

Prerequisites

Int 13, Combat Expertise.
Benefit

You do not provoke an attack of opportunity when you attempt to trip an opponent while you are unarmed. You also gain a +4 bonus on your Strength check to trip your opponent.

If you trip an opponent in melee combat, you immediately get a melee attack against that opponent as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt.
Normal

Without this feat, you provoke an attack of opportunity when you attempt to trip an opponent while you are unarmed.
Special

At 6th level, a monk may select Improved Trip as a bonus feat, even if she does not have the prerequisites.

A fighter may select Improved Trip as one of his fighter bonus feats.

Nope, in 3.5 you didn't get a free attack after tripping.


To be precise (3.5):
1) if you trip someone and if you do not have Improved Trip, there is no free attack afterwards,
2) if you trip someone and if you have Improved Trip, you have free attack afterwards,
3) failing to trip opponent may result in being tripped in return (many prerequisites apply here, so opportunity to countertrip is a rare occurrence). If countertrip occurs, however, start the procedure from 1) :)

Regards,
Ruemere


Yes. Pathfinder tripping has been quadruply-nerfed:
1. More difficult base (DC 15 + CMB);
2. Half the bonus from Improved Trip (+2 vs. +4);
3. Follow-up attack now costs an extra feat (Greater Trip);
4. Follow-up attack now costs an attack of opportunity, instead of being "immediate" (and presumably non-action-consuming).

Tripping in 3.5 was one of the few battlefield-control methods for melee characters that was viable in the long run. Yes, hamstringing it will make people less likely to do it preferentially, but its popularity derived in large part from the fact that most other melee strategies at higher levels were nigh-useless. Personally, I'd much rather they pulled the rest of melee up to par, rather than just making tripping useless... but that obviously wasn't my decision to make.

Sovereign Court

Kirth Gersen wrote:

Yes. Pathfinder tripping has been quadruply-nerfed:

1. More difficult base (DC 15 + CMB);
2. Half the bonus from Improved Trip (+2 vs. +4);
3. Follow-up attack now costs an extra feat (Greater Trip);
4. Follow-up attack now costs an attack of opportunity, instead of being "immediate" (and presumably non-action-consuming).

Tripping in 3.5 was one of the few battlefield-control methods for melee characters that was viable in the long run. Yes, hamstringing it will make people less likely to do it preferentially, but its popularity derived in large part from the fact that most other melee strategies at higher levels were nigh-useless. Personally, I'd much rather they pulled the rest of melee up to par, rather than just making tripping useless... but that obviously wasn't my decision to make.

I hear you: I've never really seen the use of overrunning or bull rushing. Tripping and disarming are both useful melee tactics, IMO, but bull rushing and overrunning? not so methinks. This gives an advantage to dex fighters, as improved trip/disarm are under the combat expertise tree, and bullrush/overrun under the power attack tree.

Although overrunning can now be done as part of a charge, and specifically does not waste an attack if the enemy decides to avoid you... which may make this feat slightly more interesting now.


Kirth Gersen wrote: Yes. Pathfinder tripping has been quadruply-nerfed:
1. More difficult base (DC 15 + CMB);

For SOME cases. For instance, assuming +0 BAB/+0 Stat Mod characters:
[+0 BAB vs. AC 10 = 55%] * [+0 STR vs. +0 STR/DEX = 50%] = [approx. 25%]
while the same vs. CMB DC 15 = [30%]
Yes, I'm aware that in many other cases (like high level Melee-ists vs. Melee Brutes), the 15 DC is much more penalizing, but if you look at the statistics people came up with for "Maneuver AC" (a specific interpretation/variant of Beta CMB), it ends up being VERY close to the 3.5 chances of success across all combatants. ...Have hope :-)

2. Half the bonus from Improved Trip (+2 vs. +4);
Maintaining the same numeric bonus which previously applied to only half of the checks would signifigantly increase the chance of success. Reducing it to +2 seems an attempt to maintain it's relative value, though a flat bonus simply CAN'T scale 100% identically in both a 1-roll and 2-roll system for all potential match-ups.

3. Follow-up attack now costs an extra feat (Greater Trip);
But everyone now has more Feats... No net less, IMHO.

4. Follow-up attack now costs an attack of opportunity, instead of being "immediate" (and presumably non-action-consuming).
This feels pretty reasonable to me, and doesn't really interfere with Trip's usefullness at high levels. A DEX mod of +2 or so is fairly reasonable for ANY high level Melee-ist ("Finesse" or "Brute") - and any Iterative Attacks past that will largely go to waste the vast majority of the time, so I don't think it's a big limiter.

I do agree that just going off the Beta & Forum Update (in this thread), the profusion of Feat Requirements/ lengthening "Chains" (i.e. Greater Trip necessary to approximate 3.5 Imp. Trip functionality) certainly wipe out any "new extra Feats in Pathfinder". Given the de-facto "requirement" of taking the "Improved Maneuver" Feats in order to use Maneuvers AT ALL effectively (avoiding AoO's), I suggested rolling the Beta's "Improved Maneuver" Feats together based on their Pre-Req's (i.e. Power Attack maneuvers together, Combat Expertise together), but keeping the "Greater Maneuver" Feats distinct (free attacks on top of special-status-effects certainly seem worth a unique Feat to me). Fundamentally though, I think having more minimum BAB requirements and less Feat Trees is a better approach, which doesn't screw non-Fighters while allowing Fighters true flexibility and breadth.

About the rest of combat in general, I seriously think that simply addressing the Standard Action/Full Action dichotomy (aiming for closer Melee/Casting Action Economy parity), along with making the Delay/Ready rules slightly more accessible (and Combat Casting more of a challenge at all levels), will do alot to keep Melee relevant thru all levels... In other words, I'm just anxious to see what Jason has done with the final ruleset :-)

Dark Archive

Kor - Orc Scrollkeeper wrote:

RE: Shall Not Pass (Combat)

This feat just seems way too powerful. Stopping movement should not be done that easily. In the very least the opponent should get a Fortitude save?

I think the feat is fine as it is. Why complicate the game by adding more dice rolls. In order for it to work you have to hit the target. It's no different than the fighter's ability in 4e that does the same thing. The restriction that they have to be moving through your threatened area also helps keep the power in check since it can't be used with ranged attacks. If the target has something that negates your threat then the feat is also useless.


In my opinion, combat maneuvers under 3.5 are messy set of exceptions. Meanwhile, under Pathfinder BETA, it's streamlined difficult challenge with negligible results.

Right now, the system we use is a variation on Pathfinder:
- new calculation of CMB - (1/2 * BAB + STR modifier + SIZE adjustment)
- new defensive CM value - 10 + CMB

Rationale:
- at higher levels success chance was too low to consider CM unless it was to be an act of desperation
- unless you had high BAB (i.e. melee class) and had a high STR score, your success chance was too low to consider CM seriously (bye, bye swashbuckling Rogues)

Playest results:
- Good enough for characters to use CM from time to time now (party level: 12)

Regards,
Ruemere

151 to 200 of 229 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Announcements / Announcement: New Feats for Playtesting All Messageboards