|
I've been over this before, but there is one feat that is capable of shutting down 12 other feats, and a myriad of interesting other original uses of the CMB mechanic.
Lets say you have two fighters. Both have 18 str and face off against each other.
The one fighter loves combat manuevers. So he took every pre-req feat(3) and then every improved feat (6) and then every greater feat (6) for a total of 15 of his 20 feats.
He faces off against fighter two who took one feat. The fighter with the one feat actually has a better chance of hitting with a CMB than the fighter who invested every feat he had into CMBs
How you ask? simple math.
Fighter A has a CMB of 15+BAB+str or 15+15+4=34 Fighter Bs attempt to hit fighter A is at +19, 34-19=15, so if fighter a provokes an AoO by say leaving a threatened square, and then attempts a CMB he has to hit a 15
Fighter B has a CMB of 15+feat+BAB+str or 15+4+15+4=38 If fighter A attempts to use any CMB on him he has a +21, 38-21=17, now if he rolls a 17 it'll be boss. But then again Fighter B only had to invest one feat, which means he could afford to take it twice and then the only way he's ever hit with a CMB is on the roll of a twenty.
This is an extreme example, but it still isn't fair even when you look at just the basics, a fighter wanting to perform the manuever has to invest a pre-req feat, and choose the specific CMB he wants.
The guy who defends makes no choice of CMB just takes one feat that covers all the bases.
Simple solution, make the person taking defensive combat manuevers choose which CMB the feat applies to and then don't allow stacking, each time he takes it it has to apply to a different CMB.
Director of Games
|
This might be true... but this feat is intended to bolster the classes without a full BAB, to prevent fighters from basically auto-succeeding most maneuvers against them at mid to high levels (as it works in the 3.5 rules).
There is, of course, another option here. This feat might allow you to count your HD total as your BAB when on the defensive, making it a feat that helps the classes without a full BAB, but does nothing for those with a full BAB.
Thoughts
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
This might be true... but this feat is intended to bolster the classes without a full BAB, to prevent fighters from basically auto-succeeding most maneuvers against them at mid to high levels (as it works in the 3.5 rules).
There is, of course, another option here. This feat might allow you to count your HD total as your BAB when on the defensive, making it a feat that helps the classes without a full BAB, but does nothing for those with a full BAB.
Thoughts
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Actually I love this idea. It would then be a choice for the weaker classes, that brings their defense on parity with the bigger guys offenses. What I love is that it also mimics a Monks manuever training ability without being as good.
I honestly didn't have a problem with Defensive combat manuevers being better, just that it didn't require a choice and shut down every CMB. I'm fine with your new suggestion, or with keeping it in it's current form with the simple caveat that when you choose it, it applies to a single CMB that way it's like the defensive version of improved CMB feats. However I like either suggestion so feel free to go with whichever you prefer.
I don't see anything in Defensive Maneuvers that suggests you can take it twice and have it stack.
If that somehow is the current reading, I would say that you should only be able to take it once. Self-limiting.
(The bonus is the same amount as Dwarven Stability)
I agree with you,
but I don't think it's so much a problem with Defensive Maneuvers,
as the WAY too many Feats needed for Maneuvers.
I think the Maneuver Feats need to be majorly consolidated,
and most of the "Greater" Feats could actually be added to the original "Improved X" Feats.
I really wish (un-Improved) Maneuvers didn't provoke AoO's at all:
then the Feats could just have better unique usages (AND the bonus)
I don't see any big reason why non-Fighter, non-Imp. Maneuver characters shouldn't be able to attempt Maneuvers without being overly penalized (AoO dmg->DC). Sure, against strong Fighter types, they shouldn't have much of a chance, but against equals?
CMB is all about making Maneuvers simpler to resolve, so why should they be so prohibitive to actually use?
There's already enough sentiment as-is, that "it's better to just try to kill them".
There is, of course, another option here. This feat might allow you to count your HD total as your BAB when on the defensive, making it a feat that helps the classes without a full BAB, but does nothing for those with a full BAB.
Fixed!
Peace,
tfad
|
|
There is, of course, another option here. This feat might allow you to count your HD total as your BAB when on the defensive, making it a feat that helps the classes without a full BAB, but does nothing for those with a full BAB.Fixed!
Peace,
tfad
Your loquaciousness has swayed me in all ways, I shall follow you to the death ;)
|
|
I don't see anything in Defensive Maneuvers that suggests you can take it twice and have it stack.
Oh on an OT note, the reason you should be able to take it twice and have it stack is because if you look at any of the numerical boost feats, many add the caveat you can take this multiple times it's effects do not stack. This means that if it hadn't specified the base assumption is that if it says nothing, you can take it multiple times and it will maybe that's just me interpreting, but I think it's a valid assumption.
There is, of course, another option here. This feat might allow you to count your HD total as your BAB when on the defensive, making it a feat that helps the classes without a full BAB, but does nothing for those with a full BAB.
But I think there's actually a value to Fighter-types being able to increase their Defensive CMB.
Like so when they're fighting Gi-normous Grappling/Tripping melee monsters.The Feat is basically Dwarven Stability against all Maneuvers (and stacks with Dwarves' Stability)
|
|
There is, of course, another option here. This feat might allow you to count your HD total as your BAB when on the defensive, making it a feat that helps the classes without a full BAB, but does nothing for those with a full BAB.But I think there's actually a value to Fighter-types being able to increase their Defensive CMB.
Like so when they're fighting Gi-normous Grappling/Tripping melee monsters.
The Feat is basically Dwarven Stability against all Maneuvers (and stacks with Dwarves' Stability)
I agree, I just think if it stays just a +4 boost it needs to be a pick one form. Otherwise it's just to readily unfair. Why is it a bad thing to have to pick one when picking the feat?
I wouldn't go by that interpretation,
but whatever the case, that'd be a good thing to clarify, since you DID make that interpretation from the RAW.
Fighters do have the option of taking the manuver that worries them most, and getting a bonus to resist it that way. (I will be the first to admit that is a tough option when you don't already have the prerequisite feats, or stats in the case of the combat expertise tree.)
If the Maneuvers are consolidated more, so there's maybe 2 or 3 "base Maneuvers", I would be more "OK" with a "declared" Defensive Maneuvers, although in the case of consolidation, I think your "problem" (# of Defensive: # of Offensive Feats) seems mostly taken care of anyways.
And like I said in another thread, most of the "Greater Maneuver" Feats could actually be granted by the "Improved Maneuver" Feats themselves.
Oh on an OT note, the reason you should be able to take it twice and have it stack is because if you look at any of the numerical boost feats, many add the caveat you can take this multiple times it's effects do not stack. This means that if it hadn't specified the base assumption is that if it says nothing, you can take it multiple times and it will maybe that's just me interpreting, but I think it's a valid assumption.
I don't see anything in Defensive Maneuvers that suggests you can take it twice and have it stack.
I do believe that every one of the feats that say it's effect do not stack, also say, just previously, this feat can be taken multiple times. This leads me to believe that if the feat does not say that you can take it multiple times, then as a general rule, you cannot.
|
|
I do believe that every one of the feats that say it's effect do not stack, also say, just previously, this feat can be taken multiple times. This leads me to believe that if the feat does not say that you can take it multiple times, then as a general rule, you cannot.Oh on an OT note, the reason you should be able to take it twice and have it stack is because if you look at any of the numerical boost feats, many add the caveat you can take this multiple times it's effects do not stack. This means that if it hadn't specified the base assumption is that if it says nothing, you can take it multiple times and it will maybe that's just me interpreting, but I think it's a valid assumption.
I don't see anything in Defensive Maneuvers that suggests you can take it twice and have it stack.
The problem with that is that if it was something that you can't do, typically they spell it out. So somewhere in the feats chapter you would see a line saying "unless otherwise specified you may not take a feat more than once" or something similar. I can't imagine them just leaving a rule like that out to be assumed, not something that big and important to every character. The typical way they got around that was to name the type of bonus, so that taking it twice doesn't gain you anything because similar bonuses don't stack. But keep in mind no rule is preventing you from taking it twice it just provides no benefit.
However the Extra _______ feats actually do provide the argument against stacking in so much that they specifically say "you can take this feat multiple times, it's effects stack" implying that normally feats don't.
I don't really worry about it, I wouldn't attempt to stack them, and no one I know would either, but I just wanted to point out that it is a possible interpretation.
Even without stacking, the improved CMB feats don't stack either and therefor it's still one feat that beats out several others.