Acrobatics checks being ridiculously easy to make (and therefore negating the value of the Mobility feat) is another thing we'll need to address. Kind of like the way Spellcraft checks to cast defensively are too easy to make.
Ok, here are some playtest results:
1) The name Shall Not Pass is somewhat of a misnomer. A more appropriate name would be Shall Not Get Away. You will get more use out of this feat if you engage your foes, rather than take up a defensive position and hope they are stupid enough to run by you. The rationale for engaging is that you force your opponents into your adjacent squares. After seeing it play out, I agree with Jason that threatened squares is too much.
2) This feat has great potential in dungeon (or otherwise confined spaces). In fact, I have found that the larger your opponent is, the better this feat is. If you are facing large opponents, you can hold them off in a 25' wide space. If they are huge, you can hold them off in a 35' wide space! How's that saying go? "The bigger they are, the... ummm... easier they are to hold off!"
3) If 2 characters have this feat, you can influence enemy movement significantly.
4) As I have stated earlier, I like this feat NOT DOING DAMAGE. I like the choice: "do I take my AoO normally, or do I try to stop this guy?" Also, this could allow for reach weapon users to benefit from the feat. If the feat states: "whenever an enemy tries to move through any square adjacent to you, you may take an AoO to end the enemy's movement." I think stopping the foe and doing damage at the same time is too good. It should be AoO for normal damage, or AoO to prevent movement, not the best of both worlds. Keep in mind, as long as you are successful in your attempt, you will be full-attacking on your turn. (in other words, decide if you want to take one attack now... or all of your attacks later)
Sample scenario:
1) fighter charges opponent 30' away
2) foe attempts to ignore fighter and go after juicies
3) fighter gets AoO, succeeds on hit & dmg; foe is prevented from further movement... decides to attack fighter
4) fighter's turn... full attack.
Some issues to be resolved:
1) It's still just as easy to stop an ogre as it is a halfling... that doesn't seem right. Is CMB check the answer? Or an attack roll followed by a reflex save?
2) Acrobatics can circumvent this feat. To what effect, I don't know as I haven't playtested it yet, but I'm wondering if Shall Not Pass should also grant a bonus to the DC vs. Acrobatics check of foes.
3) Potential problem with Spring Attack. First of all, Spring Attack can get you past someone with Shall Not Pass if you set up right. However, once engaged Shall Not Pass can lock down a Spring Attack specialist. Not sure if this is good or bad, but I'd like to point out that Shall Not Pass' prereq is Combat Reflexes, and Spring Attack's prereq are Dex 13, Dodge, Mobility, BAB +4.
4) I'm not convinced Shall Not Pass needs Combat Reflexes as a prereq. It's certainly a useful combo, but low Dex character will lose out if CR stays.
BTW... after playtesting Shall Not Pass, I change my mind about preferring Stand Still. A combination of parts from both of these would be best.
|
Yeah, I can live with SNP (basically an autostop in adjacent squares) staying as it is and Stand Still (works in threatened squares so stacks with Lunge but allow for opponent to avoid effect), as between them they cover the sort of stuff I'd like to see in terms of meleers getting some better control over the battlefield, but for that to happen we'd need Jason to add a PFRPG Stand Still version to the feats list...
EDIT: Or maybe the feats can be combined to give one effect in adjacent squares and another in threatened non-adjacent squares. Also, I agree with the concern over the Combat Reflexes feat prerequisite. Can any fighter/meleer not take this feat, particularly the heavy armour tank types? Stand Still currently has only a Str 13 prerequisite, which makes it an easy take for those guys...
In these situations would the use of the withdraw action have made a difference in how things played out both in getting past he fighter and escaping from the BBG.
I was wondering that myself. It seems a question of combat space. I'm trying to put together some simple animations mocking up this looks like on the tactical level.
Oops on the earlier part, I guess the multiple versions of 3e I'm working with is starting to get to me. My bad XD. Still 3 feats not to bad.
*Edit* Got one and half animations done, I say SnP should not do damage. The AoO should only be used to stop them or hurt them, not both with a single feat.
Also, I agree with the concern over the Combat Reflexes feat prerequisite. Can any fighter/meleer not take this feat, particularly the heavy armour tank types? Stand Still currently has only a Str 13 prerequisite, which makes it an easy take for those guys...
My concern with Combat Reflexes as a prereq is that a martial character will lose out on Shall Not Pass, unless he has at least a 12 Dex. Why would you choose Combat Reflexes if you did not at least have a 12 Dex?
I think a BAB prereq would be more appropriate and leave it at that.
In these situations would the use of the withdraw action have made a difference in how things played out both in getting past he fighter and escaping from the BBG.I was wondering that myself. It seems a question of combat space. I'm trying to put together some simple animations mocking up this looks like on the tactical level.
If the feat is changed from adjacent squares to threatened area, I think the feat becomes too good... as in current chain fighter specialist too good. This is because a Withdraw Action doesn't become a safe option either.
With the adjacent square limit, a foe could still withdraw from you and not pay the consequences of this feat. Keeping a withdraw action valid fits the flavor of this feat as well IMO... "Thou Shall Not Pass"... and your opponent backs off.
|
|
My concern with Combat Reflexes as a prereq is that a martial character will lose out on Shall Not Pass, unless he has at least a 12 Dex. Why would you choose Combat Reflexes if you did not at least have a 12 Dex?
I think a BAB prereq would be more appropriate and leave it at that.
Yeah, that's what I meant. Heavy Armour tanks maybe want this feat more than anyone, and yet Dex is relatively useless to them (or, at least, it's their third stat and maybe they need Int for Combat Expertise and that feat chain), so they'd be investing in Dex just to get this feat.
|
|
If the feat is changed from adjacent squares to threatened area, I think the feat becomes too good...
It's worth pointing out that Spiked Chain Tripper still works (you just need an extra feat, but then, you get more feats now). But, like Stand Still, there's a higher bar to clear in getting the thing to work, wheras SNP is much easier. Which is, as I said, I would like Stand Still Pathfinderised as it, with Lunge, gives us the general Spiked Chain Tripper stuff but with -4 AC and whatever numbers Jason puts on it for success.
It's worth pointing out that Spiked Chain Tripper still works (you just need an extra feat, but then, you get more feats now). But, like Stand Still, there's a higher bar to clear in getting the thing to work, wheras SNP is much easier. Which is, as I said, I would like Stand Still Pathfinderised as it, with Lunge, gives us the general Spiked Chain Tripper stuff but with -4 AC and whatever numbers Jason puts on it for success.
If the feat is changed from adjacent squares to threatened area, I think the feat becomes too good...
True, but are you hoping that the spiked chain gets reigned in a bit? I know I am. I know it should wait for the equipment forum, but I'll quickly mention this:
|
|
I guess my attitude to Spiked Chain is that it illustrates what meleers ought to be able to do, whilst leaving me somewhat dismayed because I don't like the flavour. I want it to be the case that a meleer, suitably feated, can threaten both adjacent squares and those 10' away and make AoOs can that stop an opponent. The Spiked Chain Tripper, should the trip succeed, then gets to inflict damage, so I would like Stand Still to have a higher success chance. With that, I am maybe OK with Spiked Chain staying in the game as it is, because it then becomes an option rather than almost the only viable option. I am not sure that Spiked Chain Tripper is then overpowered, modulo further changes in CMB (because arguably the CMB mechanic just makes manoeuvres too hard at present), but I'm not attached to it (it would just have to be clear, should it be removed or nerfed, that there are alternatives to Spiked Chain Tripper that are at least as good).
|
There is a spiked chain in my current PFRPG play test, Also 2 Campaigns back I had a Chain Fighter in my 3.5 campaign. The way tripping is done right now, the Chain is nerfed way down. Just to make it somewhat viable we have added dex bonus to the CMB, however the 15+ had to be reduced to 10+ CMB or you couldn't do a CMB against anything (with or without the dex adds). So right now Tripping Chain is not working. That all being said I fully expect the CMB to be reworked when we get to combat.