|
S
e
o
n
i
Where is the rules for parring and blocking? Forgive me i cant find them...
Do i still need to give up my attacks to be able to parry an opponent or block their attack? I really would like to be able to have fights where pc and npc can parry each others attacks using one of their attacks of the round to do so. so if i am a fighter level 6 I would have +6/+1 (i think not looking at the source book) i would like to be able to parry an attack using the lowest bonus and then using my +6 to counter attack the opponent or use my shield to block their attack.
Being a fighter of level 6 I would expect that a person with only one attack (meaning lower level) would have a difficult time trying to hit me.
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
Something like that would be cool the fighter would be able to parry or block attacks from a person while some one else is attacking them. If a warrior is doing that the monster (intelligent) or npc would focus on other characters that are not fighter which can parry or block their attacks.
I think in combat it opens a avenue of tactics and game play that previous games had never looked into it.
another thing to think about is the ability to parry or block (intercept) an attack that is targeting another friend not the fighter. that also would be great.
Do do you think?
I have a fearful memory of my old days of D&D - BECMI edition, when the introduction of Weapon Masteries created the 'Deflect-Syndrome': a few of the weapons (namely, all the swords, with the Longsword as 'Queen of the Battlefield', with a damage of 2d6+8 vs. melee weapon-wielders -'Hand-Held' - at Grand Mastery) could negate all damage from a weapon hit with a simple Save vs. Death up to three times per round(a.k.a. 'A Fighter needs to roll 2 or more to negate 3 attacks per round')... Entire tribes of Frost Giants could face my adventurers only with a 'Wrestle-Them-All' tactic (there was no size limit to the Deflect, and most weapon-wielder monsters didn't have iterative attacks...)
Just taking a peek at my trusted, old Rules Cyclopedia (it's just near my monitor...), and shivers start again.
No, please, a roll that negates a melee hit is over the top for my standards.
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
ah... right ok you have a good point. but i not talking about the example you have posted, I saying something completely different.
for starts let me clarify .
Fighter vs Fighter (same size and same size weapon)
they would be giving up one of their attacks to "try" to parry or block one of the opponent attack.
failing the parry or block he would be hit damaged would be rolled.
A Game master allowing a fighter to parry a frost giants hammer now that would be broken the rule should not allow. instead if tried the weapon could be disarmed and / or sundered. and the frost giant would still deal his damage.
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
GURPS has combat rules that turn attack rolls into contests versus the targets Parry, Dodge, or Block rolls (his choice), and when you can build an optimized parrying munchkin it slows down combat severely.
makes sense.
only if you make so thought.
by giving up your AC on the current target and just using your parry or block there is no extra step .... but as it goes a high level npc fighter at level 16 could parry the first attacks of 3 players and only attack once. if he chooses to do it. or even parry or block 4 attacks and not attacking once that round. it open a much more tactiful type of game play you would not be parring like mad because it would just leave you open and reliant on you AC.
Makes more sense for him to focus on one target bringing down a storm of cuts and punctures to get the pc down but again relying on his AC for protection (mainly dodging and the armour protection really is).
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
It is shame that in the past it was done poorly but that doesn't mean that these things can not be done certainly doesn't mean that they are not fun or that they break game play.
Lets try in, hypothetical world, if Paizo were working on something like that and that done properly everyone here were happy to use it. what would the rules be like?
basically what would be acceptable by the community?
If you want a parry, just make it a combat maneuver, like sundering, disarming, grappling, bull rushing, etc. Use one attack to roll 1d20+CMB against DC 15 + opponent's CMB. If you succeed, one of the opponent's melee attacks is negated, if made before the beginning of your next turn. This way, larger, stronger, and/or more skilled opponents are harder to parry, which makes sense.
I'm happy with parrying, blocking, etc. being covered under the headings of "fighting defensively" and "combat expertise".
But note that the Pathfinder version of the Duelist PrC has a Parry ability (not to mention Riposte).
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
Yea may be that is where they will be covered. I not completely familiar with the maneuvers yet i have to read the book, as far as i know they are not like 3.5 yeah?
What is the duellist PrC ? Do you have a link to a book or resource on-line for it?
Edit:
Found this Duelist
is that what you mean? if so the elaborated parry is not really what we have in mind instead it give another passive modifier to AC when fighting defensively.
If you want to most profitably discuss the Pathfinder game, my recommendation would be to download the Beta playetest rules (including the prestige class web enhancement) from this site, and read them (look at the top, under "My Downloads"). The stuff you're looking at is all pre-Beta 3.5 edition rules; there's a separate section on the boards (for "older games" or something), if those are the rules you want to keep talking about.
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
If you want to most profitably discuss the Pathfinder game, my recommendation would be to download the Beta playetest rules (including the prestige class web enhancement) from this site, and read them (look at the top, under "My Downloads"). The stuff you're looking at is all pre-Beta 3.5 edition rules; there's a separate section on the boards (for "older games" or something), if those are the rules you want to keep talking about.
No no, i want to talk about the beta rules not the old ones, i only used the link because i didnt know about the web echn file. *looking at it now*
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
Now that is something like I was talking about.
Parry
At 2nd level, a duelist learns to parry the attacks
of other creatures, causing them to miss. Whenever the
duellist takes a full attack action with a light or one-handed
piercing weapon, she can elect not to take one of her attacks.
At any time before her next turn she can attempt to parry an
attack against her or an adjacent ally as an immediate action.
To parry the attack, the duelist makes an attack roll, using
the same bonuses as the attack she chose to forego during
her previous action. If her attack roll is greater than the roll
of the attacking creature, the attack automatically misses.
For each size category the attacking creature is larger than
the duelist, the duelist takes a –4 penalty on her attack roll.
The duelist also takes a –4 penalty when attempting to parry
an attack made against an adjacent ally. The duelist must
declare the use of this ability after the attack is announced,
but before the roll is made.
Still i would not promote this to basic combat, see below the same text with some modifications
Parry
Whenever the character takes a full attack action, she can elect not to take one or more of her attacks.
At any time before her next turn she can attempt to parry one or more
attacks made against her or an adjacent ally as an immediate action.
To parry the attack, the character makes an attack roll, using
the same bonuses as the attack she chose to forego during
her previous action. If her attack roll is greater than the roll
of the attacking creature, the attack automatically misses.
For each size category the attacking creature is larger than
the duelist, the duelist takes a –4 penalty on her attack roll.
The character also takes a –4 penalty when attempting to parry
an attack made against an adjacent ally. The character must
declare the use of this ability after the attack is announced,
but before the roll is made.
Still need some work, i think if the character misses to parry they should get hit, or the roll of the monsters should use their ac with out their dexterity modifier.
What changes would you make?
S
e
o
n
iIs there any rules around for shield blocking?
I don't think there are any official rules except the fact that the AC bonus gained from shields are supposed to symbolize blocking. I made a feat long ago which may be something more along the lines you are talking about.
Shield block (Combat)
Requirements: Base attack +3, Proficiency in shield
You can automatically block one melee or ranged attack each round, but your shield will take damage as if a sunder attempt were made against it from the attack you block. You lose the shield bonus to your AC normally gained by using a shield in any round you use this feat. You must declare that you are using this feat before the opponent has made his attack roll. You can’t use this feat if you are flat-footed, Pinned or grappled. You can't block touch attacks with this feat.
Like I said above, in 3.5 blocking & parrying falls under the general rubric of AC rather than being a separate hit-negating mechanic.
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
Like I said above, in 3.5 blocking & parrying falls under the general rubric of AC rather than being a separate hit-negating mechanic.
which is really good. But it does give the sense that you are playing that game of boxing the plastic one you see film sometimes... the mindless game of hit, miss, hit, miss, hit, miss. the mechanics dont promote role playability. a duel would be mcu more exciting if you were able to parry or block something. like my example from the level 16 warrior.
S
e
o
n
iNice shield block rule. would anyone change anything on it?
I guess someone could argue that the automatic blocking with the feat could be considered to good. The reason why I made it automatic, was because I based this feat of Deflect arrows, and you risk damaging your shield when using it. You will also lose your shield bonus to AC since you have to focus your shield onto a single attack. In playtest this feat has fared pretty good in my campaigns, and hasn't been a gamebreaker yet.
which is really good. But it does give the sense that you are playing that game of boxing the plastic one you see film sometimes... the mindless game of hit, miss, hit, miss, hit, miss.
Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots?
I find the idea that that game is so old that it only exists in archival film footage a bit depressing.
:-) (Just kidding.)
S
e
o
n
iNice shield block rule. would anyone change anything on it?
Our last game had a rule similar to your parry option, where iterative attacks could be delayed out-of-turn to deflect or evade blows from enemies. We had the option of either parrying, blocking (with a shield) or evading the attack. Success in either three option meant that no damage was taken from this attack. Basically, it was someting like that:
Parry: Attack roll replaces AC against this melee attack.
Block: Attack roll + shield AC bonus replaces AC against this ranged or melee attack (except large missiles like giant-thrown boulders etc).
Evade: Reflex save replaces AC against 1 attack of any kind. (adjust saving throw by -5 for each iterative attack just as with BAB)
It worked very good IMO, but it made encounter against monsters with few attacks and low BAB even less dangerous than they already are.
hope this can help.
'findel
As has been mentioned, the creators of the game long ago decided to make attack resolution require only a single die roll.
They did this to speed up play.
Your AC assumes you are already parrying normally.
A round in D&D is 6 seconds (long ago it used to be a whole minute). During 6 seconds, the attacker presumably makes multiple attacks, feints, lunges, jabs, twists, ducks, bobs, and weaves, and so does the defender. Somewhere in there, they each take a shot at each other, or more than one shot if they are higher level.
So parrying and dodging is already assumed in the combat system as is.
Feats like Dodge or Combat Expertise assume the person taking the feat is extra good at dodging and parrying.
The same holds true for shield blocking. Pick up a heavy shield, and your AC goes up by 2. Why? Obviouly, you are doing your best to block your foes' attacks. This is assumed in the game system too.
For example, if an orc needs a 13 to hit you, he will hit with 40% of his attacks. Pick up that heavy shield, and now he needs a 15 to hit you, which is only 30% of his attacks. This means that, statistically, you are shield-blocking 1 out of every 4 attacks that orc makes (in this example) since now only 3 out of 4 attacks that used to hit you will still hit you while you wield that heavy shield.
Adding a mechanic that turns that 1-roll attack resolution into a multi-roll attack resolution will just slow down game play.
Is it realistic? Not really.
Is it cinematic? Not at all.
But it is part of the system as designed. Parrying and blocking happen constantly in the melee round, they're just not documented and they don't require separate rolls.
Wishing for them to require separate round-by-round treatment, including additional die rolling and number crunching, is tantamount to wishing for slower combat.
Combat takes long enough already.
I'm somewhat disappointed that the duelist has rules for this. Get ready to handle slow combats when duelists are being played. Worse, get ready for DMs and Players to start saying "hey, this dueilist idea is cool, let's make that a regular combat option for everyone." Then get ready for your hour-long combats to turn into hours-long combats.
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
I know what you and I agree with most part. If done properly for example you would forgo your AC and if you fail you get hit, damage is rolled in the same way AC works. You could only parry and block as many attacks as you wish to forgo. It would not slow anything down as much as anything. I feel that for the sake of it, it would bring value specially to role play as it would incite more creativety it would not be just a match of hit and miss. What if you were happy with it would do?
As has been mentioned, the creators of the game long ago decided to make attack resolution require only a single die roll. (...)
True, this "getting better at avoiding blows" thing is partially represented by higher hp. But the game adopt a new flavour with a new house rule, and this one is just as good as any others.
And indeed, the pathfinder's duelist PrC creates an antecedent in the core rule that is tempting to develop "full scale"; with results that may not work with every gaming group's style or expectation of the game.
'findel
(...) You could only parry and block as many attacks as you wish to forgo. It would not slow anything down as much as anything. (...)
Yes, on the whole, our house rules didn't used more "rolls" than RAW. However, careful characters (and antagonists) would deal less damage and receive less damage, which made the combat last longer by 25% to 50%.
'findel
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
Role Play is pretty much in the spirit I just honestly believe that it would add value to the experience.
While I though the idea was nice I don't think it is final, the discussion here is turning out really good with some good and valid points and some creative ideas however I'm getting the feeling that because of other games and implementations of combat rules such as parry and blocking, most players are against it from the outset, is unfortunately making the conversation move a bit harder. I not blaming anyone only making note of that. We should try to push any prejudice aside just for second to allow us to see with eyes unclouded. I like to continue this journey at least for my own sake.
I will bullet point what has been said.
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
(...) You could only parry and block as many attacks as you wish to forgo. It would not slow anything down as much as anything. (...)Yes, on the whole, our house rules didn't used more "rolls" than RAW. However, careful characters (and antagonists) would deal less damage and receive less damage, which made the combat last longer by 25% to 50%.
'findel
I totaly follow you on that, I am trying to think on ways to reduce the length of battle using a hybrid of ours ideas. Can you think of a way to do that we could compare and find out what could be done.
I totally follow you on that, I am trying to think on ways to reduce the length of battle using a hybrid of ours ideas. Can you think of a way to do that we could compare and find out what could be done.
From my experience, these rules will only lengthen you combats, unless your characters have lower hp than the norm. However, if this is what you and your group enjoy, your combats may be more interesting and thus worth the increased time of a fight. This may lead to less combats, more meaningful ones.
This may also lead to inventive ways from the players to disable their enemies, especially if the players feel that their adversaries are invulnerable unless they gang-up on them. That was a cool side effect.
By the way, the parrying option is not advantageous against numerous enemies, so throwing a bunch of weaklings against PCs will upset their parrying habits if it get out of control.
'findel
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
Ah really happy and thankful for your input, i am quite excited about all of this, it is good that you have the experience on using something link that. My group? I wish i lonely on that i hope to convince my other half to play test pathfinder with me. hopefully fingers crossed.
I will compile all that we have spoken about then we can cross things out or reword them for i get the feeling that we are getting somewhere.
which is really good. But it does give the sense that you are playing that game of boxing the plastic one you see film sometimes... the mindless game of hit, miss, hit, miss, hit, miss.Rock 'Em Sock 'Em Robots?
I find the idea that that game is so old that it only exists in archival film footage a bit depressing.
:-) (Just kidding.)
Oh it still exists, they slapped a "TRANSFORMERS" sticker on that sucker so fast after the last movie your head would spring out of it's socket. Except now the robots are 'Optimus Prime' and 'Megatron', not just 2 generic unpainted robots.
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
Right as promised here is the first draft:
- Parry:
Whenever the character takes a full attack action she can elect not to make one or more of her attacks. At anytime before her next turn she can attempt to parry and attack against her or adjacent ally as an immediate action. to parry the character makes an attack roll using the same bonuses as the attack she chose to forego during her previous action. if her attack roll is greater than the roll of the attacking creature the attack automatically misses. for each size category the attacking foe is larger than that character the character takes - 4 penalty on her roll, when attempting to parry an attack made against an adjacent ally the character she take a - 4 penelty to parry that attack. the character must declare the attempt to parry an attack before the foes attack is rolled.
- Blocking:
Whenever the character takes a full attack action she can elect not to make one or more of her attacks. At anytime before her next turn she can attempt to block and attack made against her. to block the character makes an attack roll using the same bonuses as the attack she chose to forego during her previous action plus the shield AC bonuses (including any enchanting bonus). if her attack roll is greater than the roll of the attacking creature the attack automatically misses and for each size category the attacking foe is larger than that character the character takes - 4 penalty on her roll. when the an attack is blocked the damaged is done instead to the shield.
It's one of the major weaknesses of D&D mechanics. Blocking or deflecting blows with your weapon is your first line of defense, not something tacked on as an afterthought.
That's why D&D originally had 1 minute combat rounds, assuming lots of blocking, parrying, feinting and jockeying for position went on during that minute. The more one tries to simulate a fight blow-by-blow the worse the system is (yes I'm talking about GURPS).
Contributor
|
You might also want to check out "Art of the Duel" pdf from Sinister Adventures. It has all kinds of duelling feats (including Parry and Riposte), as well as a new Combat Maneuver. It's available on the Paizo site for $1.50, and has several good reviews.
This is the bomb. Solves it all with elegance and panache. No game should be without it. Heck, stuff from this made it into Paizo's material as special abilities. No RPG library should be without this, IMO.
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
I think i might buy it here.
You might also want to check out "Art of the Duel" pdf from Sinister Adventures. It has all kinds of duelling feats (including Parry and Riposte), as well as a new Combat Maneuver. It's available on the Paizo site for $1.50, and has several good reviews.This is the bomb. Solves it all with elegance and panache. No game should be without it. Heck, stuff from this made it into Paizo's material as special abilities. No RPG library should be without this, IMO.
S
e
o
n
iI think i might buy it here.
You might also want to check out "Art of the Duel" pdf from Sinister Adventures. It has all kinds of duelling feats (including Parry and Riposte), as well as a new Combat Maneuver. It's available on the Paizo site for $1.50, and has several good reviews.This is the bomb. Solves it all with elegance and panache. No game should be without it. Heck, stuff from this made it into Paizo's material as special abilities. No RPG library should be without this, IMO.
I also have to throw in my 2 coppers in support of the Art of the Duel. It's a great resource and should help with what you wanted a lot.
You might also want to check out "Art of the Duel" pdf from Sinister Adventures. It has all kinds of duelling feats (including Parry and Riposte), as well as a new Combat Maneuver. It's available on the Paizo site for $1.50, and has several good reviews.This is the bomb. Solves it all with elegance and panache. No game should be without it. Heck, stuff from this made it into Paizo's material as special abilities. No RPG library should be without this, IMO.
This. Absolutely! :)
As has been mentioned, the creators of the game long ago decided to make attack resolution require only a single die roll. (...)
True, this "getting better at avoiding blows" thing is partially represented by higher hp. But the game adopt a new flavour with a new house rule, and this one is just as good as any others.
And indeed, the pathfinder's duelist PrC creates an antecedent in the core rule that is tempting to develop "full scale"; with results that may not work with every gaming group's style or expectation of the game.
'findel
Excellent.
I totally support you in seeking any house rules you want.
I found this thread under the Pathfinder RPG/Design Forums/Combat section, so naturally I assumed the original poster was wanting to discuss options for combat that might be incorporated into the official Pathfinder RPG combat system. Since that's what this forum is primarily about.
Hnce my reply, trying to put things into perspective with the actual existing game rules and previous design considerations.
But now that I know this is a house rule discussion, I fully support parrying. I fully support opposed combat rolls. It's all good.
As long as it is not core to the official combat system.
Heck, I even have feats for Parry and Riposte in my houserules.
Parry on!
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
I feel that the book mentioned above is very good and go into great lengths to make combat actual combat, but the execution is not one i favour you cant solve every thing with feats. some one should be able to parry or block an attack period with no help from feats. (feats could help of course but not be the only way to learn to parry or block).
|
|
S
e
o
n
i
Did anyone look at the first draft of the rules i posted before? if you did what would you do to make it better or what you think it would be required to make it so you would not mind actually using it?
if you havent seen it here it is again.
- Parry:
Whenever the character takes a full attack action she can elect not to make one or more of her attacks. At anytime before her next turn she can attempt to parry an attack against her or adjacent ally as an immediate action. to parry the character makes an attack roll using the same bonuses as the attack she chose to forego during her previous action. if her attack roll is greater than the roll of the attacking creature the attack automatically misses. for each size category the attacking foe is larger than that character the character takes - 4 penalty on her roll, when attempting to parry an attack made against an adjacent ally the character she take a - 4 penelty to parry that attack. the character must declare the attempt to parry an attack before the foes attack is rolled.
- Blocking:
Whenever the character takes a full attack action she can elect not to make one or more of her attacks. At anytime before her next turn she can attempt to block and attack made against her. to block the character makes an attack roll using the same bonuses as the attack she chose to forego during her previous action plus the shield AC bonuses (including any enchanting bonus). if her attack roll is greater than the roll of the attacking creature the attack automatically misses and for each size category the attacking foe is larger than that character the character takes - 4 penalty on her roll. when the an attack is blocked the damaged is done instead to the shield.
Sorry for the misunderstanding but i have never said anything about house rules, my intention is the contrary, I like to see something like it in the core book.
I feel that the book mentioned above is very good and go into great lengths to make combat actual combat, but the execution is not one i favour you cant solve every thing with feats. some one should be able to parry or block an attack period with no help from feats. (feats could help of course but not be the only way to learn to parry or block).
Just remember this while you're discussing a whole new defensive mechinic:
1. Backwards compatibility is important. 3e doesn't support core parry mechanics, so you risk damaging backwards compatibility if you try to add core parry mechanics to PRPG.
2. It braks some things. How does a Beholder parry? Or a wolf? Or many, many other creatures in the core monster books? If you create a core mechanic that players can use *all the time* but that only some monsters can use at all, you will break the challenge rating of monsters that cannot use this core mechanic.
3. There is already a "protect yourself" mechanic in the core game. The system of rolling to hit against your foe's AC already assumes that that foe is doing *everything* he/she/it possibly can to avoid your blows. That means it is dodging, ducking, weaving, leaning, twisting, whirling, jumping, lunging - and blocking and parrying - all the time during combat. That's why it has an AC. If you paralyze it, or Hold Monster, or whatever, its DEX drops to zero and its AC drops by many points, because it is no longer actively defending itself. Since D&D and PRPG already have a system in place whereby defenders can defend themselves, adding another mechanic to let them defend themselves even more means defenders get two defenses against every attack.
4. Consider Combat Expertise, the feat that lets smart defensive combatants reduce their offensive effectiveness in favor of increasing their defensive effectiveness. In essence, using this existing mechanic means you give up some of your chances to hit your enemy and focus on blocking/parrying/avoiding your enemy's attacks instead. Pretty much what you're looking for, already in the game.
5. Also consider Fighting Defensively and Total Defense. These are combat maneuvers that increase your ability to defend yourself at the expense of your ability to attack. In essence, using these existing mechanics means you give up some or all of your chances to hit your enemy and focus on blocking/parrying/avoiding your enemy's attacks instead. Pretty much what you're looking for, already in the game.
Now consider all those points together. Imagine a skilled fighter, fighting defensively and using Combat Expertise (dodge bonuses stack). Wearing good armor with a decent DEX Modifier. Already this guy is really hard to hit for a reasonable CR-appropriate encounter. Already this guy is really good at dodging, ducking, weaving, leaning, twisting, whirling, jumping, lunging - and blocking and parrying - all the time during combat
Now let him parry incoming attacks too, and reasonable level-adjusted foes are never going to hit him. Well, almost never. And now give him Riposte, so he can damage his enemies without breaking his Parry defenses, and he's a deadly unkillable turtle that can only be stopped by the Tarrasque.
At least until he is overwhelmed by vastly superior numbers or vastly superior skills. Or stopped by a Hold Person (et. al.) spell.
And the combat to take this guy down could take an entire afternoon at the game table.
All together, the reasons against parry mechanics as core are overwhelming:
1. Backwards compatibility.
2. Broken CRs with monsters that can't parry.
3. Invincible defenders.
4. Multiple defensive mechanics.
5. Long, long combats.
I'm afraid that Parrying rules are going to forever remain as house rules, splat books, or "What if?" sidebars.
Until the game designers want to do away with AC entirely, fold Fighting Defensively and Total Defense and Combat Expertise into an active defense mechanic, rewrite many encounters and adjust many CRs of many monsters, and throw backwards compatibility and quick combat resolution out the window.
Again, I support parrying as a house rule. I use it myself.
But I think that's all it will ever be in a d20 system.
DM Blake pretty much nailed the reasons for this.
However...
If you want a D&D style "parry effect", here's what it would look like (going by current D&D mechanics and methods):
Parry
You excel at blocking attacks with your weapon.
Prerequisite: Combat Expertise, Int 13+, BAB +3
Benefit: You must be using a weapon you are proficient with, and you must be using the Combat Expertise feat to use this feat. Once per round when you would normally be hit with a weapon, you may deflect it so that you take no damage from it. You must be aware of the attack and not flatfooted. Attempting to deflect a weapon doesn’t count as an action.
Natural weapons, and weapons held by creatures more than one size larger than you cannot be blocked. You may block an unarmed strike.
Special: If you have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, you may parry with an unarmed strike.
Riposte
Your ability to parry blows allows you to create an opening against your opponent.
Prerequisites: Combat Expertise, Int 13+, BAB +6, Parry
Benefit: When you parry an attack, the opponent provokes an attack of opportunity.
.
This uses a mechanic already in the game (Deflect Arrows), doesn't make combat any longer really... in fact, since it's automatic, it takes no time to apply and now you don't have to figure damage and effects, speeding up play.
Jason's proposed Greater Maneuver feats opens the door for the "make your target provoke an attack of opportunity" mechanic. It's self limiting (have to have an Attack of Opportunity available to get the extra attack, etc).
This is how I'd introduce the idea of Parrying and Riposting.